:confused:
Printable View
:confused:
Me.
I picked Sugar Ray but it really depends on how we are grading them as "best". If you are saying who, in my opinion, should be ranked the highest historically, then I stand by Ray. If you are asking who played the game the best (factoring in self promotion, risk vs. reward...etc.), then it becomes a Ray vs. Mayweather debate in my mind. If you are asking who was the most physically gifted and impressive of the three, then that would be Roy in my opinion. Either way, all three are/were great fighters and accomplished more than the vast majority could ever dream of.
Paul kevin
I'm talking about the whole package. Career and talent
Who accomplished the most and who looked the best (at their best)
Ray won gold, Roy silver and Floyd bronze
So I guess who'd say Ray had the better amateur career.
Floyd won the most titles, Ray beat the bigger names
But Roy cleaned out and dominated his division.
Paul KevinQuote:
Originally Posted by GaMo
Honestly, I don't recall Roy ever cleaning out a division he was in, where both Ray and Floyd cleaned out divisions. If we are talking the whole package then I rank them in this order:Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMo
1. Ray
2. Floyd
3. Roy
I think Ray has both hands down on quality of opposition and special performances. Difficult to top the Duran and Hearns wins, and then throw in Benitez and the fight vs. Hagler (thought Ray lost but he got the win and performed MUCH better than I anticipated) and it is tough to match that level of competition. Roy has both on the "eye test", where he just looked so much more superior than everyone else, especially during his dominant performances against Ruiz, Montell, Toney...etc. Floyd is a balance between the two to me, where he beat slightly less impressive competition than Ray, but never had some of the "wow" performances of Roy. If you take Ray out and throw Manny, Hopkins, and Evander in there it will be a much more difficult debate in my opinion.
Sugar ray Leonard was amazing. As good as Mayweather was, Leonard was better IMO. His physical attributes were superior to Mayweather. Mayweather beats him in defense for sure and ring IQ. Jones was just a freak of nature. So in order I would probably say
Leonard
Jones
Mayweather
Leonard is a solid #1 and the other two could be switched.
I picked Ray Leonard, and I am not a fan of his as I only ever saw the boxer that beat Hagler onwards. He was the original Floyd, hand picking his fighters, weights and titles which were manufactured for him. I was so happy when he miscalculated and fought Terry Norris who battered him and then Macho Man.
However at welterweight he was a true great and was the total package. Leonard fought the best fighters and proved to be a truly great fighter from his come from behind win to beat another great fighter in Tommy Hearns. Leonard proved his heart, chin and punch power.
Roy Jones was awesome but p4p Leonard would beat Jones.
Floyd Mayweather is a complete and utter wanker in comparison.
I can't think of many 147 pounders in the history of the sport who could've beaten Hearns the night Leonard came from behind for the stoppage. Maybe Robinson would've beaten Hearns, but I honestly can't think of one other welter in HISTORY who could've won that night. So, Ray beat one of the greatest lightweights (Duran), Welterweights (Hearns), and Middleweights (Hagler) in the history of the sport. Floyd's win over Chico Corrales and Hatton were his two best in my opinion, but he beat some solid competition during his career (more solid wins than Ray or Roy in my opinion). Roy looked unbeatable vs. Montell Griffin and James Toney, but didn't have as big a single win as the other two in my opinion.
He held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
Darius was the lineal champ and they shared the division and Roy never beat him. Do I think Roy would have beaten him? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he didn't clean the division out. Hagler, Hopkins, JCC, Duran, Joe Louis, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis...etc., all cleaned their divisions out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
Michalczewski never fought outside of EuropeQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodDarius was the lineal champ and they shared the division and Roy never beat him. Do I think Roy would have beaten him? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he didn't clean the division out. Hagler, Hopkins, JCC, Duran, Joe Louis, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis...etc., all cleaned their divisions out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
And Boxing in Germany during the 90s was so corrupt
Just look at Sven Ottke's career and you'll see it
Biased refereeing and blind judges.
I'm sure Roy would've welcomed him in America
But after the Olympics Roy wasn't keen on traveling
And Germany was the last place you'd want to go back then.
Leonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Not saying you are wrong on your points, but fact still remains that he never cleaned out the division. Was the same thing at 160 and 168 as well. I thought Roy was clearly the best, but you still have to beat the other top fighters in your division to prove it. I thought GMan was by far the better fighter than Nigel Benn, and look how that turned out. Same with Tyson vs. Douglas. Just because you are favored or are perceived to be the guaranteed winner doesn't mean that it is a foregone conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoMichalczewski never fought outside of EuropeQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodDarius was the lineal champ and they shared the division and Roy never beat him. Do I think Roy would have beaten him? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he didn't clean the division out. Hagler, Hopkins, JCC, Duran, Joe Louis, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis...etc., all cleaned their divisions out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
And Boxing in Germany during the 90s was so corrupt
Just look at Sven Ottke's career and you'll see it
Biased refereeing and blind judges.
I'm sure Roy would've welcomed him in America
But after the Olympics Roy wasn't keen on traveling
And Germany was the last place you'd want to go back then.
Feel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
You have got me thinking now that a great athlete (Jones) could beat a great boxer (Hopkins) which does not sit right with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodFeel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
I think Roy's unorthodox style and physical gifts would give technicians/fundamentally sound fighters a very difficult time. The first Hop fight was close for that time frame (8-4 rounds), and Hop closed the gap as the rounds went on. I feel like Hop learned a lot during that fight and changed his style specifically for a Roy rematch. Not saying it would have been a guaranteed win for Hop, but the 2001 Hop gives Roy a very tough fight in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYou have got me thinking now that a great athlete (Jones) could beat a great boxer (Hopkins) which does not sit right with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodFeel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Roy's kryptonite, in my opinion, would be a Vernon Forrest/Antonio Tarver type of fighter. Someone with a great jab, solid fundamentals, who had the threat of a big punch behind that jab. I always feel that guys like Michael Nunn, Frankie Liles...etc., would have given Roy fits with their styles. Potentially a dirty, mauling Hop would have also (in my opinion).
He definitely didn't clean out 160, 168 or HeavyweightQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot saying you are wrong on your points, but fact still remains that he never cleaned out the division. Was the same thing at 160 and 168 as well. I thought Roy was clearly the best, but you still have to beat the other top fighters in your division to prove it. I thought GMan was by far the better fighter than Nigel Benn, and look how that turned out. Same with Tyson vs. Douglas. Just because you are favored or are perceived to be the guaranteed winner doesn't mean that it is a foregone conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoMichalczewski never fought outside of EuropeQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodDarius was the lineal champ and they shared the division and Roy never beat him. Do I think Roy would have beaten him? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he didn't clean the division out. Hagler, Hopkins, JCC, Duran, Joe Louis, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis...etc., all cleaned their divisions out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
And Boxing in Germany during the 90s was so corrupt
Just look at Sven Ottke's career and you'll see it
Biased refereeing and blind judges.
I'm sure Roy would've welcomed him in America
But after the Olympics Roy wasn't keen on traveling
And Germany was the last place you'd want to go back then.
But he beat the best at 168 (Toney) and the best at 160 (Hopkins)
Guys like Eubank and Benn never seemed in a rush to fight him
Ottke and Calzaghe never left home. At 175 Jones was the man
So much so that I think he'd have an easy night with Andre Ward.
Agree with most of what you say. I think Ward is the modern day Hopkins, so again, I don't think Roy is a guaranteed winner or has an easy night with Ward. Ward and Hop both are masters at shutting down the other guy's offense and making him fight an uncomfortable fight. Ward is bigger than Hop, so that makes it even more difficult for Roy. Would be a great match up in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe definitely didn't clean out 160, 168 or HeavyweightQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot saying you are wrong on your points, but fact still remains that he never cleaned out the division. Was the same thing at 160 and 168 as well. I thought Roy was clearly the best, but you still have to beat the other top fighters in your division to prove it. I thought GMan was by far the better fighter than Nigel Benn, and look how that turned out. Same with Tyson vs. Douglas. Just because you are favored or are perceived to be the guaranteed winner doesn't mean that it is a foregone conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoMichalczewski never fought outside of EuropeQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodDarius was the lineal champ and they shared the division and Roy never beat him. Do I think Roy would have beaten him? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he didn't clean the division out. Hagler, Hopkins, JCC, Duran, Joe Louis, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis...etc., all cleaned their divisions out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoHe held just about every belt available at 175Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He held the WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO, IBF, WBF, IBA
And Ring Magazine titles at Light-Heavyweight
The WBO and WBU are the only belts he didn't own
But he was quite clearly the man at 175.
And Boxing in Germany during the 90s was so corrupt
Just look at Sven Ottke's career and you'll see it
Biased refereeing and blind judges.
I'm sure Roy would've welcomed him in America
But after the Olympics Roy wasn't keen on traveling
And Germany was the last place you'd want to go back then.
But he beat the best at 168 (Toney) and the best at 160 (Hopkins)
Guys like Eubank and Benn never seemed in a rush to fight him
Ottke and Calzaghe never left home. At 175 Jones was the man
So much so that I think he'd have an easy night with Andre Ward.
Roy beat all styles to me, the tall rangy southpaw (I forget his name and was no Nunn or Liles) was completely outclassed. In fact so was Virgil Hill.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI think Roy's unorthodox style and physical gifts would give technicians/fundamentally sound fighters a very difficult time. The first Hop fight was close for that time frame (8-4 rounds), and Hop closed the gap as the rounds went on. I feel like Hop learned a lot during that fight and changed his style specifically for a Roy rematch. Not saying it would have been a guaranteed win for Hop, but the 2001 Hop gives Roy a very tough fight in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYou have got me thinking now that a great athlete (Jones) could beat a great boxer (Hopkins) which does not sit right with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodFeel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Roy's kryptonite, in my opinion, would be a Vernon Forrest/Antonio Tarver type of fighter. Someone with a great jab, solid fundamentals, who had the threat of a big punch behind that jab. I always feel that guys like Michael Nunn, Frankie Liles...etc., would have given Roy fits with their styles. Potentially a dirty, mauling Hop would have also (in my opinion).
I think Leonard would beat Jones p4p he had a better jab and power also his concentration and focus was the best.
If I remember correctly, didn't jones have a broken hand in the bhop fight? I could be wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI think Roy's unorthodox style and physical gifts would give technicians/fundamentally sound fighters a very difficult time. The first Hop fight was close for that time frame (8-4 rounds), and Hop closed the gap as the rounds went on. I feel like Hop learned a lot during that fight and changed his style specifically for a Roy rematch. Not saying it would have been a guaranteed win for Hop, but the 2001 Hop gives Roy a very tough fight in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYou have got me thinking now that a great athlete (Jones) could beat a great boxer (Hopkins) which does not sit right with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodFeel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Roy's kryptonite, in my opinion, would be a Vernon Forrest/Antonio Tarver type of fighter. Someone with a great jab, solid fundamentals, who had the threat of a big punch behind that jab. I always feel that guys like Michael Nunn, Frankie Liles...etc., would have given Roy fits with their styles. Potentially a dirty, mauling Hop would have also (in my opinion).
"When I beat Bernard Hopkins and won the IBFQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherIf I remember correctly, didn't jones have a broken hand in the bhop fight? I could be wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI think Roy's unorthodox style and physical gifts would give technicians/fundamentally sound fighters a very difficult time. The first Hop fight was close for that time frame (8-4 rounds), and Hop closed the gap as the rounds went on. I feel like Hop learned a lot during that fight and changed his style specifically for a Roy rematch. Not saying it would have been a guaranteed win for Hop, but the 2001 Hop gives Roy a very tough fight in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYou have got me thinking now that a great athlete (Jones) could beat a great boxer (Hopkins) which does not sit right with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodFeel that Toney was the better win for Roy, as (we've discussed this before) I feel like Hop was green at the time and not the complete fighter he became in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterLeonard was amazing the night he beat Hearns and Jones and Floyd do not have that name on their record. Jones did beat Toney and Hopkins but they are not as great as Hearns was that night. Leonard had to dig deep to win and probably ended his career with the eye damage caused.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Roy's kryptonite, in my opinion, would be a Vernon Forrest/Antonio Tarver type of fighter. Someone with a great jab, solid fundamentals, who had the threat of a big punch behind that jab. I always feel that guys like Michael Nunn, Frankie Liles...etc., would have given Roy fits with their styles. Potentially a dirty, mauling Hop would have also (in my opinion).
The right was hurt, beat him with the left."
Y'all musta forgot! ;D
Ward and Floyd were undefeated.
We must take that into account.
A prime Roy would beat money mayweather but would he beat the pretty boy version?
SRL for me.
Benitez
Duran
Hearns
Hagler
Doesn't get much more impressive than that.
Roy never left home either (forget the excuses, I know them all, just stating a fact). The only reason he had the IBF/WBA titles at LH was because Michalczewski was stripped after beating Hill. The Ring changed their rules to gift/promote Roy.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMo
So unless you believe Americans should get special dispensation for being American Roy should have travelled to challenge the true champ - Michalczewski.
Fair point but like I said, Germany was corrupt back thenQuote:
Originally Posted by FensterRoy never left home either (forget the excuses, I know them all, just stating a fact). The only reason he had the IBF/WBA titles at LH was because Michalczewski was stripped after beating Hill. The Ring changed their rules to gift/promote Roy.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMo
So unless you believe Americans should get special dispensation for being American Roy should have travelled to challenge the true champ - Michalczewski.
Extremely bad judging and unprofessional refereeing
Meant that Jones would have to have scored a knockout to win.
Just look at Sven Ottke's unbeaten title reign as an example
For talent ,achievement and power this guy was better than all 3.
He once floored David Haye something Wlad could not do.
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...tid=4200&stc=1
I've seen a few Ottke "robberies" that weren't robberies, they were close/debatable decisions that he had every right to win. People claim "robbery" about disputed decisions week in week out, especially when they haven't seen the fights they're talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoFair point but like I said, Germany was corrupt back thenQuote:
Originally Posted by FensterRoy never left home either (forget the excuses, I know them all, just stating a fact). The only reason he had the IBF/WBA titles at LH was because Michalczewski was stripped after beating Hill. The Ring changed their rules to gift/promote Roy.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMo
So unless you believe Americans should get special dispensation for being American Roy should have travelled to challenge the true champ - Michalczewski.
Extremely bad judging and unprofessional refereeing
Meant that Jones would have to have scored a knockout to win.
Just look at Sven Ottke's unbeaten title reign as an example
Foreign fighters in America claim it's corrupt/inept when they lose too.
Leonard is leading this poll but isn't surprising
But you could argue that he lost to Hagler (I had it a draw)
And that he lost the return with Hearns (I think he did)
So he could actually be 3-3 against Hagler, Hearns and Duran.
Leonard benefited and thrived in a legendary era, cliché but he clashed with like minded greats and that tips it for me. Mayweather became more of a chorographer in career and actual bouts sometimes felt secondary especially after Hatton and wtf retirement. Look only couple weeks ago. Tremendous boxer but a piss attitude and hardly pushed beyond 'just getting the w' at least to me. Somewhere along the line we started hearing..mainly in mma friendly lead up and post Mcgregor..oh he's the best boxer ever and pointing to being 50-0. Roy was a reflex phenome and superb athlete but as has been mentioned he really did have a silver platter and a very very cushy network contract at the time. They basically rotated some very thin 'mandatories' sprinkled in with an early version of Hopkins, a Toney who looked and acted like he was psyched out before the bell even rang and a Virgil Hill. Those were top notch wins and he embarrassed Toney and Toney deserved it but where Jones holds those as 'best' wins they don't tend to be blemishes for a Toney or a Hopkins. Not really. The did very well improved afterwards, specifically Hopkins. He beat good fighter for sure, Griffin, Harding, Tate, and Johnson. Jones had company at 168 and frankly he had zero interest in cleaning house. For one he didn't have to and hindsight being 20-20 so many now say 'well he would have cruised Benn or Eubank or Michalczewski. I'm not so easily convinced and we'll never know. There was noooo chance HBO was going to do business with Showtime for fans to see either. To some degree I may hold him still fighting against him. It's farcical and damn dangerous. Then again a shot ghost of Leonard was being ko'd by Camacho so there's that :-X.
Leonard will win this poll, boxing fans are very nostaligic
in reality he would lose to both jones and mayweather by some margin
Leonard wins because he is really is the best not because of nostalgia. I am not even a fan of his but even I realise that he is one of the greatest fighters in the history of the game. His accomplishments in the ring are better than Jones and Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Roy might have beat him as he's naturally bigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Floyd? No way. He was at his best below welter.
Prime Oscar and Mosley would have beat Floyd at welter too let alone Ray.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
As I said, you could argue that he lost to Hagler and Hearns (the return)Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
So his record against the big three could actually be 3 wins and 3 defeats.
I believe that Hagler is very overrated. He couldn't stop Duran over 15 rounds
And Duran was a blown up lightweight. He lost to Leonard who was really a welterweight
(who had not fought in almost three years) and he never moved up to 175
He could have fought Matthew Saad Muhammad, Dwight Muhammad Qawi
Or Michael Spinks but instead he waited for the smaller men to move up
And then struggled with them when they finally did fight him.
Yeah, Roy did fight his fair share of bums to be fairQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
And HBO were happy for him to do that unfortunately.
It’s a shame he didn’t stay at heavyweight after he beat Ruiz
He could have fought Byrd, Holyfield, Tyson or Toney
Those would have been huge fights for him at the time
I believe a fight with Byrd would’ve been a unification fight.
Well, Eubank never chased big fights and was happy to stay at homeQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
How many American fighters did Eubank actually fight?
Benn said he was happy being second best to Roy Jones
Benn has some decent wins but let’s be honest he wasn’t an elite fighter
He was like the black British version of Arturo Gatti.
Jones should have fought Michalchewski for sure but where?
Neither man wanted to travel so both are to blame for it not happening.
They really went overboard affording Jones with what I believe was "a record contract" at the time and once Merchant started harping on a p4p set up with of all people Pernell Whitaker :-X became a bit much. Think that was during the Antoine Byrd fight. The thing with post Ruiz and Jones is it always felt like they never planned for it realistically, it was all about getting that 'big' heavyweight name-fight initially hence all of the early Tyson talk. You're right about Byrd. Actually think that would have been a tremendous style clash and in spots just like looking in the mirror though Byrd was more straight ahead and seemed to do better against squat power house type heavy's. For all the fast sharp pop he had Jones could match it, but Jones would also be facing someone with similar reflex speed. I'd pay to see that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
As I said, you could argue that he lost to Hagler and Hearns (the return)Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
So his record against the big three could actually be 3 wins and 3 defeats.
I believe that Hagler is very overrated. He couldn't stop Duran over 15 rounds
And Duran was a blown up lightweight. He lost to Leonard who was really a welterweight
(who had not fought in almost three years) and he never moved up to 175
He could have fought Matthew Saad Muhammad, Dwight Muhammad Qawi
Or Michael Spinks but instead he waited for the smaller men to move up
And then struggled with them when they finally did fight him.
Yeah, Roy did fight his fair share of bums to be fairQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
And HBO were happy for him to do that unfortunately.
It’s a shame he didn’t stay at heavyweight after he beat Ruiz
He could have fought Byrd, Holyfield, Tyson or Toney
Those would have been huge fights for him at the time
I believe a fight with Byrd would’ve been a unification fight.
Well, Eubank never chased big fights and was happy to stay at homeQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
How many American fighters did Eubank actually fight?
Benn said he was happy being second best to Roy Jones
Benn has some decent wins but let’s be honest he wasn’t an elite fighter
He was like the black British version of Arturo Gatti.
Jones should have fought Michalchewski for sure but where?
Neither man wanted to travel so both are to blame for it not happening.
Eubank to be honest never impressed me and for more reason than he was Benns rival. Said it before and definitely in the minority but remember watching the Thornton fight and blown away at how wide the cards were. He could be out hustled and I thought he was in large gaps there. Never expected Eubank to jump at a Jones fight but Benn said on a couple of occasions that while Jones was a cut above he would be willing to mix it up as champions should. There was a small window after he beat McClellan but Jones and promotion had zero interest. Benn also traveled and rebuilt his career in the States after loss to Watson. Benn and Gatti while the same rapid passion I don't see. If anything Gatti fought smarter and boxed early namely with Patterson and became face first as career and damage went on. Physically the poor guy looked like someone wrapped a bag of feral cats over his head even after his wins and he seemed to be either with weight advantages many times or on the other end at welter where he didn't belong. Benn was a caveman early and did show improved boxing when rising to 168 and found a jab. He was never brought in as an opponent to make another look stellar or propel them save for one time and he turned those plans on their head beating p4p ranked G Man. Thought he also deserved rematch with Eubank.
Nice posting. Are these in sonnet form?Quote:
Originally Posted by GaMoQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
As I said, you could argue that he lost to Hagler and Hearns (the return)Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
So his record against the big three could actually be 3 wins and 3 defeats.
I believe that Hagler is very overrated. He couldn't stop Duran over 15 rounds
And Duran was a blown up lightweight. He lost to Leonard who was really a welterweight
(who had not fought in almost three years) and he never moved up to 175
He could have fought Matthew Saad Muhammad, Dwight Muhammad Qawi
Or Michael Spinks but instead he waited for the smaller men to move up
And then struggled with them when they finally did fight him.
Yeah, Roy did fight his fair share of bums to be fairQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
And HBO were happy for him to do that unfortunately.
It’s a shame he didn’t stay at heavyweight after he beat Ruiz
He could have fought Byrd, Holyfield, Tyson or Toney
Those would have been huge fights for him at the time
I believe a fight with Byrd would’ve been a unification fight.
Well, Eubank never chased big fights and was happy to stay at homeQuote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
How many American fighters did Eubank actually fight?
Benn said he was happy being second best to Roy Jones
Benn has some decent wins but let’s be honest he wasn’t an elite fighter
He was like the black British version of Arturo Gatti.
Jones should have fought Michalchewski for sure but where?
Neither man wanted to travel so both are to blame for it not happening.
I don't know about these hypothetical playoffs really. The only certainty I have is that Joe Calzaghe was not only the best looking fighter, but also the best fighter of all time. Then it is James Toney.
Out of these three I would say Leonard as he could do a bit of everything and fought the best. Then it would be Mayweather as he can also do everything, but he picked and chose so he is below. Then it is Jones Jr as I have erased the Toney fight from my memory and he too picked and chose a little. In his prime he wouldn't get tagged much, but against a hypothetical Mayweather or Leonard he would get tagged and I'm not sure the chin holds up. Leonard and Mayweather have great chins.
thought we were talking lb4lb?Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterRoy might have beat him as he's naturally bigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Floyd? No way. He was at his best below welter.
Prime Oscar and Mosley would have beat Floyd at welter too let alone Ray.