Jones-Tarver II set for May 15...who wins?

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:05

Gotta go for Jones. I think Tarver got as close as he ever will last time.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:07

ditto

Southpaw Stylist · Post by **Southpaw Stylist** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:09

Jones in another tough, but clear victory.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:21

Still don't think it will happen, if it does it will be Jones' second mistake since turning pro. I like what he said immediately after the Tarver fight - I hope he sticks to it.

It was odd that Jones was the only one who didn't show at the press conference.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:25

I don't think we're going to get a Griffin II kind of revenge (cause revenge is basically what this fight is about) but Jones Jr will definitely win clearly.

Tarver can't fight much better than he did last time whereas Jones was a shadow of himself.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:29

Tarver won the first fight ...hopefully he gets the decision in the rematch.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:32

stujones wrote: It was odd that Jones was the only one who didn't show at the press conference.

He's skipped press conferences plenty of times before, Stu. The guy simply has better ways to spend his time.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 15 Mar 2004, 11:33

Kilburn wrote:
stujones wrote: It was odd that Jones was the only one who didn't show at the press conference.
He's skipped press conferences plenty of times before, Stu. The guy simply has better ways to spend his time.

Yeah, he wasn't even at Winky's big win over Mosley - and he manages Winky.

J · Post by J » 15 Mar 2004, 11:34

agree loftgroov, i dunno Tarver could do all right, I've got a funny feeling bout this one, he basically will kick himself for the rest of his career if he doesnt, as he had it in the palm of his hand and gave the judges a cop out by not pressing home his advantage in the first fight.
The MOST jones could have hoped for in my opinion was a lucky draw, to ge the decision stunk badly in my view but thats just my view

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 15 Mar 2004, 12:30

I can't see Tarver doing as well in this fight as he did in the first meeting. I think he caught Jones on an off night, and really should have won that fight.
I believe that Jones will perform a lot better, if he does he has the capability to win easily over 12 rounds.
I agree with Kilburn, i don't think he has it in him to blast Tarver out the way he blasted Griffin out in their second fight.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 15 Mar 2004, 12:45

Golden Rule Of Boxing 101: Thou shalt never bet against Roy Jones.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 15 Mar 2004, 12:47

Jones can and will stop Tarver in the return.

Jones was awful in the first fight and Tarver, put in the performance of his career and couldnt beat him.

Jones will prove he is different class.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:04

knockout artist wrote:Jones can and will stop Tarver in the return.

Jones was awful in the first fight and Tarver, put in the performance of his career and couldnt beat him.

Jones will prove he is different class.

Correction, Tarver DID beat him (in my view) ...he just didn't get the decision.

If Boxer A beats Boxer B by 4 rounds, but the corrupt judges give the fight to Boxer B (because he is worth so much in PPV contracts..) ..how is that Boxer A's fault?

Tarver beat Jones, no question.

And for those of you that don't feel Tarver beat Jones, tell me this;

Re-watch the fight and tell me how the F*CK Jones beats Tarver???????

(How does throwing less punches, landing less punches than your opponent whilst getting pinned in the corner and hit with flurries of punches constitute "winning the fight". It's drawing up an old argument I know, but anyone who says Jones WON that fight is seeing it through some very RJJ tinted sunglasses....)

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:13

I had their first fight a clear draw, which should have meant Tarver retained the belts....

I think Jones was horifically weight drained last time, he looked 100 years old in there, his face was drawn and he looked gray.

Tarver gets whooped in a rematch, unless Jones' weight draining wasn't an issue, which I find hard to believe.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:26

jones will prove his greatness in the rematch

i still maintain the middle and super middleweight jones is the greatest boxer in history.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:32

hitman_hatton1 wrote:i still maintain the middle and super middleweight jones is the greatest boxer in history.

That's a bold statement!!
Are you basing that on natural talent or on achievement?

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:33

Loftgroov wrote:(How does throwing less punches, landing less punches than your opponent whilst getting pinned in the corner and hit with flurries of punches constitute "winning the fight".

Where did you get the "landing less punches" statistic?

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:37

I have to go with a Jones win possibley by a wide points verdict, Jones has had much more time to settle back into the 175lbs division and IMO will be far sharper and fresher this time.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:40

glittermonkey wrote:
hitman_hatton1 wrote:i still maintain the middle and super middleweight jones is the greatest boxer in history.
That's a bold statement!!
Are you basing that on natural talent or on achievement?

talent and easily shutting out 2 of the best boxers of the last 15 yrs

he was also sparking ultra durable fighters like sugarboy malinga and thomas tate and just blitzing every1 with his speed and power.

the guy was a genius

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:46

Eric the Viking wrote:
Loftgroov wrote:(How does throwing less punches, landing less punches than your opponent whilst getting pinned in the corner and hit with flurries of punches constitute "winning the fight".
Where did you get the "landing less punches" statistic?

http://www.compuboxonline.com/stats/sta ... rver.shtml

Tarver landed 47 jabs, to Jones 17.

Jones (apparently) landed more power punches (not that I saw..)

But in total, Tarver was busier.

kevo · Post by **kevo** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:47

KOJOE90 wrote:I have to go with a Jones win possibley by a wide points verdict, Jones has had much more time to settle back into the 175lbs division and IMO will be far sharper and fresher this time.

I agree, Jones has probably kept his weight down this time around, so that won't be a factor in tis fight, and as a result, we'll see the Roy jones we're all used to.
Jones by lopsided decision.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:51

hitman_hatton1 wrote:
glittermonkey wrote:
hitman_hatton1 wrote:i still maintain the middle and super middleweight jones is the greatest boxer in history.
That's a bold statement!!
Are you basing that on natural talent or on achievement?
talent and easily shutting out 2 of the best boxers of the last 15 yrs he was also sparking ultra durable fighters like sugarboy malinga and thomas tate and just blitzing every1 with his speed and power.

the guy was a genius

I don't disagree, in terms of god given talent i believe he probably is the best ever.
It's just that i like to take a fighters career as a whole when discussing who the best fighters ever are. And to be fair, with the amount of talent Jones has he could have done so much more in the last few years.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 15 Mar 2004, 13:56

MightyWarrior wrote:Golden Rule Of Boxing 101: Thou shalt never bet against Roy Jones.

You must be quids in after the Froch bet, MW. As TheGoods said, pick and choose the sure-fire winners and it's like taking candy from a baby. I wonder what the bookies will make of Hatton-Pinto? Pinto looks formidable on paper. But I can't see him beating Ricky.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 15 Mar 2004, 14:00

yeah i know what ya saying but if u read a bit harder you'll noticed i said the middle and super middleweight jones is the best ever. i don't include the light heavyweight version in that.

the light heavyweight version is not as good and hasn't bought the power with him

and i think only moved up for further challenges not cos he was struggling to make the weight.

overall i think jones is right up there already in terms of longevity and achievement. he's a 4 weight world champ over a nearly 11 yr period.

concerning jones fighting at heavyweight i don't hold it against him if he never fights there again as he is simply not a heavyweight.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 15 Mar 2004, 14:04

bennie wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:Golden Rule Of Boxing 101: Thou shalt never bet against Roy Jones.
You must be quids in after the Froch bet, MW. As TheGoods said, pick and choose the sure-fire winners and it's like taking candy from a baby. I wonder what the bookies will make of Hatton-Pinto? Pinto looks formidable on paper. But I can't see him beating Ricky.

Yes bennie, I had a good weekend all in all

Looked a bit dodgy for Froch early on though.

Hatton is 1/4 over at Stan James - bit of a shot in the dark with an unknown puncher like Pinto though, I haven't seen anything of him. But like you say, Ricky should win this - or SN have made a serious error.

I like Vitali over Sanders defintely - but not at the odds I'm seeing at the moment.

http://www.stanjames.com/betnav/sportvi ... ame=Boxing