IS ROY JONEs THE GREATEST EVER

[Nameless]

Personally, I would go with two things:

1) It is impossible to determine who the greatest ever is; The caliber of competition changed a lot during the eras and through the weight categories, what should really exist is like a top 20 of the best ever without a ranking from last to first, this is way too subjective and I seriously do not believe we can hold such "roster".
2) Jones JR belong to the greatest ever; spending something like 10 years without losing a round, that's something indeed, he did damage his legacy toward the end, sure, but then again, how many great ones including ALi did the same thing? Not a big deal if you ask me.

He should considered in the greatest of all times, I would even dare to say that he might have had the fastest hands ever seen in the business during his prime but like all the other greats, he should not be considered THE greatest, matter of fact, I would dare to put at least one name before him: Sugar Ray Robinson, and even him, I wouldn't venture to say he was THE greatest.

[Gandalf]

He's a great fighter, but it's impossible to determine whether he's the greatest. A lot of great fighters in different weight classes in different generations. It's too complicated to ever say with certainty. Certainly a special fighter in our times. I would just leave it at that.

[Master]

He is the greatest fighter I have ever seen -which is since 1986.

[Spicoli]

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 boredom,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?

Really ....I mean really ?I do think Roy faced some adversity in the 1st Griffin go and although he one upped a still developing Hopkins,he had some moments on the ropes and shined through.As I stated, much respect.But Yes....I think to be considered an all time great one has to face the adversity of those fellow long reigning Champions amongst the ranks.Come back from strife in the ring.After all Jones was coming into Benns,Michalczewski divisions.I was never big on Eubanks and frankly did not get the impression that he wanted anything to do with Jones...or Toney.You can look spectacular against a long line of 'Mandatory' defenses and some others afforded by the Major network promoters but it leaves the public wanting the best fighting the best.No matter what the division or who the fighter is...thats all you can hope for...and dem,and for your dollars.I dont think Roy did that.Credit for Toney and Hopkins with out a doubt though.

Michalczewski had 20+ successful defenses,albeit for the WBO belt but was a serious threat and legit Champion.Like I said...Roy on paper had the skills and speed to beat him but I'm not 100% convinced.Gonzalez got him on the tail end of his career & many years after Roy took Gonzalez.Julio also did what Roy would not...take risks and travel from the confines of his home base.Now I cant totally fault his thinking especially when HBO was OKing the opponents that were better known to American fans,though not exactly all of them top caliber for top dollar...and no strife between rival promoters.After Darius beat up Virgil hill and sat there with three belts,the fight made all the sence in the world....instead,Jones fights Hill ,for no belt.

Benn actually had a fight with Nunn in the works and it was being set up.Then along comes tough luck Steve Littles and takes his strap.So Benn signs to fight Littles,who pulls out and ends up facing a last minute sub instead.I think Benn would have fought anyone frankly.He had no problems going into foreign soil and fighting in a guys backyard,did it quite a bit early on.After the McClellan win,that fight was the only one that made sence for both Imo.I honestly think it effected both Jones and Benn greatly.Benn was calling him out and from what I remember,Roy says 'not just yet'.He may or may not have whipped Benn,but again missed an opportunity to meet a top fellow champion and fight the best and take the may have out of the equation.Off on a ramble here,need coffee.

[Oggie]

Jones is a difficult fighter to rate in my opinion.

As people have said, his resume could have been better, but also in saying that, he utterly dominated a lot of quality fighters in his prime years.
In terms of accomplishments and record, he could be top 20 of all time.
In terms of ability, he rates a lot higher... top 5 for me.

He was not a strategic boxer at all really and when it came to technique, he was all over the shop at times. However, the one thing that sets him apart from pretty much every other fighter that has ever stepped foot in the ring was his almost superhuman physical gifts. There has never been a boxer that combined every vital physical attribute as well as prime Roy did.
His hands were a blur with speed, his feet glided across the canvas with ballet like beauty, his reflexes would make cats jealous and to top it all off, he had dynamite in his fists.

I don't think he ever really tried to outsmart or plan strategically for opponents, he simply entered the ring with the mindset that they were going to try to hit him and he had to hit them back. No matter who he fought, his style was almost always the same. His sheer athletic ability granted him this simple and effective approach, and he was never really going to legitimately lose until either;
A) Someone was even more physically gifted (which was near impossible, right?).
or
B) His athletic ability dwindled because of age or weight drain (Correct!).

So yes,
If Roy were to fight any of the past greats at his prime, there is no doubt he could potentially have beaten them all, especially considering how much boxing has advanced over the years.
But alas, when it comes down to comparing records and achievements from different eras, he falls short of the likes of Ray Robinson, Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis and Henry Armstrong to name a few.

[JudahShuffle]

If RJJ retired after he beat Ruiz I thinbk a lot of people would have him at least top 10 p4p all time. Same as with Tyson people's judgements are tainted by what happend after his prime

I totally agree. Also, if he found a way to stay at 168 lbs his entire career we'd be discussing whether he belongs in the top 3 of all time, not whether he is an all time great or not.

[X]

Jones was an awesome talent, who could do things that I've never seen a boxer do to another pro before. Amazingly fast hands, unorthodox style and he was a marquee character.

I don't think he was the greatest ever though ...... his talent was mainly based on his amazing reflexes (so he had some technical flaws that he never had to correct). Once the reflexes started to go, he became quite hittable. A few brutal knockout losses tarnished his legacy in my view.

It was also unfortunate for him - but not his fault - that he didn't really operate in an era where he had great competition. I'm not knocking his performance against Toney, which was fantastic against a great opponent, but there were not many other good fighters around and, for whatever reason, he didn't fight a lot of them.

If you look at his record, I donlt think its in the same league as Ray Robinson (something like 100 fights unbeaten before his first loss to LaMotta ... after that he went another 70 or so before losing again) or Joe Louis, 25 defences of the undisputed world heavyweight title.

Still, I think Jones is an all time great - just not the greatest ever. There's no shame in that!

[SweetPea]

I put Jones 2nd, behind Mighty Mike Arnaoutis.