Roy Jones, where did it all go wrong?

[JonesJrMayweather]

technically flawed? the 70s or 40s? GTFOH

It's getting a bit absurd that everyone rides off giving passed to the old era guys simply because they were first. In fact it's basically almost unspoken that no new fighter will ever surpass the old guys. There's always some excuse to discredit the evolution of the sport.

RJJ, FLOYD, PAC, BHOP, SWEET PEA, to name a few would compete and be great in any era.

RJJ vs those old slower plodders around his division would be smacked around. Everyone makes it seem as if because he was unorthodox that he didn't know how to box. He rarely lost rounds because he maximized his abilities. Technical skills or not if they could hit him it was rendered useless, ask reggie johnson about his technical skills, or virgil hill. Plus RJJ had tremendous power between 160-168 so its not like he was some flashy guy that could hurt someone. Once Roy tagged anyone from any era and they witnessed first hand his speed it would instantly change their game plan.

You're missing an essential point. Several actually. First calling Ezzard, Archie, Billy Fox, Jack Chase, Marvin Johnson, Mike Spinks, Victor Galindez etc slow plodders is really, really wrong. Second, speed, power etc can be nullified by superior craft. Let me make an analogy. Every year coming out of college there are a series of 6'2, 200 pound wide outs who can run 4.4 forties and jump out of the stadium. And every year a bunch crash and burn in camp. Why? Because they don't have the technique to a) even get off the line of scrimmage against a good corner b) recognize what defense is being played and/or c) how to disuise what pattern they are running. Athleticism without craft doesn't work all that well. Jerry Rice wasn't the biggest, or fastest or strongest but he knew how to play.

I find it fascinating that guys as diverse as Teddy Atlas, Freddie Roach, Dan Cuoco, Rollie Hackmer and Skeeter McClure think guys like Moore, Charles, Billy Conn, Harold Johnson would handle Roy without too much trouble.

And you're missing the point that ROY KNEW HOW TO BOX as well as being gifted. And secondly comparing football to boxing is terribly flawed as the success is dependent upon ten other men performing well. Especially using Jerry Rice, he played with the best two quarterbacks of all time (definitely the highest rated) then with rich gannon, Gannon won mvp. If Rice gets open and his QB sucks, what's the point?

Before Roy Lost to Tarver, both Bert Sugar and Max Kellerman, (old and new) said RJJ was p4p best ever. Sugar even put out a list that ranked him above SRR, but it will be discredited simply because RJJ was kayoed 15 years after turning pro or it will be dismissed to hyperbole.

[marbleheadmaui]

technically flawed? the 70s or 40s? GTFOH

It's getting a bit absurd that everyone rides off giving passed to the old era guys simply because they were first. In fact it's basically almost unspoken that no new fighter will ever surpass the old guys. There's always some excuse to discredit the evolution of the sport.

RJJ, FLOYD, PAC, BHOP, SWEET PEA, to name a few would compete and be great in any era.

RJJ vs those old slower plodders around his division would be smacked around. Everyone makes it seem as if because he was unorthodox that he didn't know how to box. He rarely lost rounds because he maximized his abilities. Technical skills or not if they could hit him it was rendered useless, ask reggie johnson about his technical skills, or virgil hill. Plus RJJ had tremendous power between 160-168 so its not like he was some flashy guy that could hurt someone. Once Roy tagged anyone from any era and they witnessed first hand his speed it would instantly change their game plan.

You're missing an essential point. Several actually. First calling Ezzard, Archie, Billy Fox, Jack Chase, Marvin Johnson, Mike Spinks, Victor Galindez etc slow plodders is really, really wrong. Second, speed, power etc can be nullified by superior craft. Let me make an analogy. Every year coming out of college there are a series of 6'2, 200 pound wide outs who can run 4.4 forties and jump out of the stadium. And every year a bunch crash and burn in camp. Why? Because they don't have the technique to a) even get off the line of scrimmage against a good corner b) recognize what defense is being played and/or c) how to disuise what pattern they are running. Athleticism without craft doesn't work all that well. Jerry Rice wasn't the biggest, or fastest or strongest but he knew how to play.

I find it fascinating that guys as diverse as Teddy Atlas, Freddie Roach, Dan Cuoco, Rollie Hackmer and Skeeter McClure think guys like Moore, Charles, Billy Conn, Harold Johnson would handle Roy without too much trouble.

And you're missing the point that ROY KNEW HOW TO BOX as well as being gifted. And secondly comparing football to boxing is terribly flawed as the success is dependent upon ten other men performing well. Especially using Jerry Rice, he played with the best two quarterbacks of all time (definitely the highest rated) then with rich gannon, Gannon won mvp. If Rice gets open and his QB sucks, what's the point?

Before Roy Lost to Tarver, both Bert Sugar and Max Kellerman, (old and new) said RJJ was p4p best ever. Sugar even put out a list that ranked him above SRR, but it will be discredited simply because RJJ was kayoed 15 years after turning pro or it will be dismissed to hyperbole.

Neither guy EVER said that. Max once said Roy was the best fighter he had seen in his life and Bert in his 2006 book ranked Jones 88th (I'm looking at it as I write this). In his recent reprint he has Jones 87th. Guys since 1990 or so Sugar has ahead of him? Finito Lopez, Sweet Pea and Evander.

[JonesJrMayweather]

technically flawed? the 70s or 40s? GTFOH

It's getting a bit absurd that everyone rides off giving passed to the old era guys simply because they were first. In fact it's basically almost unspoken that no new fighter will ever surpass the old guys. There's always some excuse to discredit the evolution of the sport.

RJJ, FLOYD, PAC, BHOP, SWEET PEA, to name a few would compete and be great in any era.

RJJ vs those old slower plodders around his division would be smacked around. Everyone makes it seem as if because he was unorthodox that he didn't know how to box. He rarely lost rounds because he maximized his abilities. Technical skills or not if they could hit him it was rendered useless, ask reggie johnson about his technical skills, or virgil hill. Plus RJJ had tremendous power between 160-168 so its not like he was some flashy guy that could hurt someone. Once Roy tagged anyone from any era and they witnessed first hand his speed it would instantly change their game plan.

You're missing an essential point. Several actually. First calling Ezzard, Archie, Billy Fox, Jack Chase, Marvin Johnson, Mike Spinks, Victor Galindez etc slow plodders is really, really wrong. Second, speed, power etc can be nullified by superior craft. Let me make an analogy. Every year coming out of college there are a series of 6'2, 200 pound wide outs who can run 4.4 forties and jump out of the stadium. And every year a bunch crash and burn in camp. Why? Because they don't have the technique to a) even get off the line of scrimmage against a good corner b) recognize what defense is being played and/or c) how to disuise what pattern they are running. Athleticism without craft doesn't work all that well. Jerry Rice wasn't the biggest, or fastest or strongest but he knew how to play.

I find it fascinating that guys as diverse as Teddy Atlas, Freddie Roach, Dan Cuoco, Rollie Hackmer and Skeeter McClure think guys like Moore, Charles, Billy Conn, Harold Johnson would handle Roy without too much trouble.

And you're missing the point that ROY KNEW HOW TO BOX as well as being gifted. And secondly comparing football to boxing is terribly flawed as the success is dependent upon ten other men performing well. Especially using Jerry Rice, he played with the best two quarterbacks of all time (definitely the highest rated) then with rich gannon, Gannon won mvp. If Rice gets open and his QB sucks, what's the point?

Before Roy Lost to Tarver, both Bert Sugar and Max Kellerman, (old and new) said RJJ was p4p best ever. Sugar even put out a list that ranked him above SRR, but it will be discredited simply because RJJ was kayoed 15 years after turning pro or it will be dismissed to hyperbole.

Neither guy EVER said that. Max once said Roy was the best fighter he had seen in his life and Bert in his 2006 book ranked Jones 88th (I'm looking at it as I write this). In his recent reprint he has Jones 87th. Guys since 1990 or so Sugar has ahead of him? Finito Lopez, Sweet Pea and Evander.

I said before he lost to Tarver, that was 2004. Kellerman has said on air numerous times that had roy retired after beating Ruiz he would have easily been considered the best ever. And soon as I find Sugar's all time list from 1997 I'll post it.

[marbleheadmaui]

technically flawed? the 70s or 40s? GTFOH

It's getting a bit absurd that everyone rides off giving passed to the old era guys simply because they were first. In fact it's basically almost unspoken that no new fighter will ever surpass the old guys. There's always some excuse to discredit the evolution of the sport.

RJJ, FLOYD, PAC, BHOP, SWEET PEA, to name a few would compete and be great in any era.

RJJ vs those old slower plodders around his division would be smacked around. Everyone makes it seem as if because he was unorthodox that he didn't know how to box. He rarely lost rounds because he maximized his abilities. Technical skills or not if they could hit him it was rendered useless, ask reggie johnson about his technical skills, or virgil hill. Plus RJJ had tremendous power between 160-168 so its not like he was some flashy guy that could hurt someone. Once Roy tagged anyone from any era and they witnessed first hand his speed it would instantly change their game plan.

You're missing an essential point. Several actually. First calling Ezzard, Archie, Billy Fox, Jack Chase, Marvin Johnson, Mike Spinks, Victor Galindez etc slow plodders is really, really wrong. Second, speed, power etc can be nullified by superior craft. Let me make an analogy. Every year coming out of college there are a series of 6'2, 200 pound wide outs who can run 4.4 forties and jump out of the stadium. And every year a bunch crash and burn in camp. Why? Because they don't have the technique to a) even get off the line of scrimmage against a good corner b) recognize what defense is being played and/or c) how to disuise what pattern they are running. Athleticism without craft doesn't work all that well. Jerry Rice wasn't the biggest, or fastest or strongest but he knew how to play.

I find it fascinating that guys as diverse as Teddy Atlas, Freddie Roach, Dan Cuoco, Rollie Hackmer and Skeeter McClure think guys like Moore, Charles, Billy Conn, Harold Johnson would handle Roy without too much trouble.

And you're missing the point that ROY KNEW HOW TO BOX as well as being gifted. And secondly comparing football to boxing is terribly flawed as the success is dependent upon ten other men performing well. Especially using Jerry Rice, he played with the best two quarterbacks of all time (definitely the highest rated) then with rich gannon, Gannon won mvp. If Rice gets open and his QB sucks, what's the point?

Before Roy Lost to Tarver, both Bert Sugar and Max Kellerman, (old and new) said RJJ was p4p best ever. Sugar even put out a list that ranked him above SRR, but it will be discredited simply because RJJ was kayoed 15 years after turning pro or it will be dismissed to hyperbole.

Neither guy EVER said that. Max once said Roy was the best fighter he had seen in his life and Bert in his 2006 book ranked Jones 88th (I'm looking at it as I write this). In his recent reprint he has Jones 87th. Guys since 1990 or so Sugar has ahead of him? Finito Lopez, Sweet Pea and Evander.

I said before he lost to Tarver, that was 2004. Kellerman has said on air numerous times that had roy retired after beating Ruiz he would have easily been considered the best ever. And soon as I find Sugar's all time list from 1997 I'll post it.

Looking forward to both!

[JonesJrMayweather]

ESPN.com: BOXING - Time to rename Jones: He's Superman <--- full article

Sugar Ray Leonard was a great fighter, the greatest of the post-prime Duran era of the 1980's. Superman is bigger than Leonard. He is faster than Leonard. Not faster in a pound-for-pound sense, but faster period. He hits harder than Leonard. He is just as smart as Leonard, just as good a boxer, and better defensively. He would have smoked Ray.
Marvin Hagler was always given trouble by mobile fighters. So how would he do against the fastest fighter of all time, a guy who can also punch? Superman would have outboxed Marvelous Marvin. Thomas Hearns had problems taking a punch -- Superman would have knocked "The Hitman" out. Any honest observer would say the same thing I am writing here. At least they'd say the same on a lie-detector test. Or they'd fail it.
Ray Robinson was too small. Rocky Marciano too slow. Robinson was in his prime as a 147-pound welterweight; Superman as a 168-pound super middleweight. Marciano would never have gotten a whiff.
And Joe Louis? Well, Billy Conn, who scored 14 knockouts in 75 fights, outboxed Joe Louis for most of 13 rounds, even badly hurting "The Brown Bomber" at the end of the 12th. Had Conn not gone for the knockout, conventional wisdom says he would have won the fight and the heavyweight title. One thing we know about Superman is that he never presses for a knockout. He exposes himself to the minimum risk possible. Or rather, he exposes himself to just as much danger as he must to win the round. He has won almost every round he has ever fought. And he might have won those rounds against Joe Louis, too.

[JonesJrMayweather]

The bert sugar list is next just as soon as I find it.

[JazMerkin]

One of the friends from my gym who boxes internationally for Jamaica was recently over sparring in Miami after the Pan-Am qualifiers and as a result of the JA connection got to spend a lot of time in the Thump gym with Glen Johnson, who he didn't get to spar with due to preparation for the Froch fight (my boy is a lefty). Anyway he says that when there he got talking to Johnson & Orlando about Roy & their take was that they believed that Roy Jones was the greatest athlete to ever play the sport, but that he never really learned the fundamentals to fall back on and that they believed they could have beaten him at any point because he just didn't know what to do when things weren't going his way. Now I don't know if they're right, but they probably have a better understanding of it than anyone on here does. I don't know how Roy would have done, but he was blessed athletically in a way few fighters are, so I think he could have worked in many an era, but there would always be a question mark over that chin.

*Regarding that Kellerman article, that's why I'm not a fan of placing people in the context of history until they've retired & you have a chance to have a sober look at their resume, whether positively or negatively.

[marbleheadmaui]

The bert sugar list is next just as soon as I find it.

Nice article. Thanks. But let's be really clear. Max Never called him the best. He said he Could become that. Obviously he didn't