Quote Originally Posted by ICB View Post
Quote Originally Posted by LondonBB View Post
Quote Originally Posted by amat View Post

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.
We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.
One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?