IS ROY JONEs THE GREATEST EVER

[Majesty]

Nah.Not for me.In hindsight,I think he may have wasted some valuable time with much lesser fights when bigger challenges were out there to be had.He may very well have walked a path on the backs of a Benn,Collins,Michalczewski,Nunn etc but we'll never know.He could have stamped his legacy in stone by facing the best available but was afforded the choice to blow out the Thortons,Sosa's,Pazienza,Brannons etc.Some of his headliners were borderline sparring sessions.He was that good indeed,but could have tested himself much more I believe.

Im not disregarding the mans pure blazing athletic skill.Just a phenom with killer instincts,timing and handspeed that left you dizzy.But he frankly complained of bordom,not getting payed enough for potential big fights and thought himself a little high & mighty.His wins over Hill,a Young Hopkins and Toney deserve much respect.Some say Toney was weight drained etc,etc,....Whos fault is that?Jones whipped him and I think was inside of Toneys head before the opening bell ever rang.Jones was a sensation,but not the very best ever we've had the pleasure to know.

Michelzhe whatever his name is I havent heard of him but on his record he lost to someone Roy beat every round.

James Toney beat Nunn. I agree he should have fought Eubank and Nigel Benn, I only saw Eubank on youtube in a few Kos and on classic against Carl Thompson the guy that beat david haye.

No one does take credit away from eubank or benns career, but they didn't fight James Toney or Michael Nunn either. As far as I know their biggest fights were against each other. I'm probably wrong but thats about all I see on their lists that their biggest fights were against each other so why don't they get any flack for not fighting James Toney? Roy Jones did that and won easily. Were Benn and Eubank truly that much better then Toney?

Also why does a fighter have to be tested hard to be considered an all time great? People throw around that he never had an opponent that gave him a rough time. But doesn't that only add to his dominance? Doesn't it make a fighter more dominant to say he was never tested when people like Hopkins, James Toney and Montell Griffin are on his record?