Roy Jones in better times?

[Goodnight, Irene]

The love for Whitaker is always welcomed in the house of Goodnight, Irene

There is a whole generation of Duran lunatics running amok out there whose insanity has gotta be balanced out D

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Just as an aside, what are everyone's thoughts on Kellerman?

--- Kellerman is what you get if you ban Cosell from announcing bouts.

In other words, if what they know about boxing could be equivocated to another job, they'd both be riding in the back of the short bus to their clothes sorting facility.

Cosell at least added some drama for the unwashed viewers whereas Kell is a thorn in the collective behind.

The corporate suits don't seem to understand that those who do understand what they're seeing don't need talking heads competing over each other to fill the air with nonsense while a perfectly good battle is being waged. Mute button, where art thou?

Going back, I like the single announcer with a guest fighter concept. Jerry Quarry was pure gold in that format with any announcer. Foreman was good in heavy matches, but Jones, everytime he opened his mouth it was like he was preening on his own rap video.

Really, Bunce may not be much, but he can at least come up with some nonsense everyone knows is farce and probably whooop the baby poop out of the younger Kellerman to boot, so he at least has some useful comedic value.

[Jaywheel]

but Jones, everytime he opened his mouth it was like he was preening on his own rap video.

so true.

[Ambling Alp]

Ok,back to the original question regarding how Jones would do against the middleweight champs of the 1940's and 1950's.
It seems that most people take one two contrasting views: Either Jones would simply toy with all of them because of his talent; or be in big trouble.

What needs to be done is consider the strengths and weaknesses of those fighters and how would Jones do against them. This actually involves putting aside your like or dislike of him.

Jonmes never fought anyone nearly as relentless as LaMotta, Basilio or Fullmer. Those guys would keep the pressure on for the full 15 rounds. Does he have the smarts and heart to dig down deep to win these fights?
He never fought punchers like Robinson or Zale. Does he have the chin to take their best shots?
He never fought fought anyone with near the talent of Robinson. Would he be able to defeat an opponent that had all the talent that he does and is used to being in tough fights?
Would Jones talent, speed, and reflexes alone be enough?

It probably would be against Cerfino Garcia, Ken Overlin, Bobo Olson. However against Zale,Cerdan LaMotta,Basilo, Fullmer, and Robinson he is going to have to show heart, the chin, and the smarts that he never had to show.

[Robinson]

Just as an aside, what are everyone's thoughts on Kellerman?

--- Kellerman is what you get if you ban Cosell from announcing bouts.

In other words, if what they know about boxing could be equivocated to another job, they'd both be riding in the back of the short bus to their clothes sorting facility.

Cosell at least added some drama for the unwashed viewers whereas Kell is a thorn in the collective behind.

The corporate suits don't seem to understand that those who do understand what they're seeing don't need talking heads competing over each other to fill the air with nonsense while a perfectly good battle is being waged. Mute button, where art thou?

Going back, I like the single announcer with a guest fighter concept. Jerry Quarry was pure gold in that format with any announcer. Foreman was good in heavy matches, but Jones, everytime he opened his mouth it was like he was preening on his own rap video.

Really, Bunce may not be much, but he can at least come up with some nonsense everyone knows is farce and probably whooop the baby poop out of the younger Kellerman to boot, so he at least has some useful comedic value.

Cosell was a terrible announcer. Give me Don Dunphy any day.

[Bricks]

I just recently stumbled upon this forum and decided to contribute.

At what time, if any, do you feel Roy Jones Jr. could have been a top contender(by this I mean able to pose a real threat to or defeat a world champion) as a middleweight in the '40s and '50s?

I, personally, don't think that his chin and heart could have stood up to the relentless pressure of the fighters of that time period. His speed and power may present problems, but who knows? Obviously he was never tested by a better that B-class(in my opinion) fighter.
I think that he may have been able to crack the top 10 for short periods of time but no more. Where do you think he would have ranked during that time period?

As Roy himself might have said, "y'all must have forgot"
Its true Roy faced a James Toney that was mentally and physically shot that night. He also beat an old Mike Mccallum. He beat a John Ruiz who wasnt allowed to get physical by the referee and a Bernard Hopkins on his way up......................you get the picture its only so much before you can start excusing Roys opponents.
Fact is Roy's speed talent and power would have enabled him to be champ at any time.
Roy was physically shot when he got beaten by Johnson and Tarver. I beleive he lost all 3 times to Tarver.

The calzaghe fight he was physically competent but simply too old.

[Ezzard]

If Roy was back in that period without his PEs and having to fight everyone multiple times he wouldn't have the same fan base. There would be some perspective on the fighter.

He'd be one of the best in the era but he has never showed the determination for anyone tor eally back him against La Motta or Cerdan. I'm not sure he has the fundamentals to take on Burley. And the punchers would be there to blast him out.

My guess is that he'd win more than he lost but he'd get KO'd by Robinson.

[PPLLUVTHIS]

That's a good question, ok now, lets look at who was some of the top mw in the 40's & 50's;
ok you got Robinson, Tiger, Olson, Lamotta, Mims, there maybe a few more I left out, with that being said; Roy would be very dominant in that era, with just a hand few that I would say make Roy think. Just like Sugar Ray, Roy had too much speed for most of them guys, they would have never knew what it them.

[CharleyMitchell]

My question is why is there so much talk about Roy Jones' talent? Obviously there's not near as much talent in the heavyweight division as in past eras, so why would there be much talent in other divisions? I would say that much like the heavyweights, the talent pool for the other divisions is mostly involved in other sports today(the past 15 years or so). I'm guessing the guys that dominated the middleweight division in the '40s and '50s are playing tailback, wide receiver, cornerback, and pointguard. I know that Jones was a good enough athlete to play in Europe, but what about the NBA or NFL? That's the caliber athlete that was dominating boxing in the '40s and '50s, in my opinion. Add to that natural ability the toughness and hunger that came from having to fight to survive and I can't see Roy Jones hanging with the top guys very often at all. Not to mention, Roy Jones lives like a spoiled athlete, there's no way he could compete with the hard, hard drinking, hard working men of yesterday.

[The Great John L]

My question is why is there so much talk about Roy Jones' talent? Obviously there's not near as much talent in the heavyweight division as in past eras, so why would there be much talent in other divisions? I would say that much like the heavyweights, the talent pool for the other divisions is mostly involved in other sports today(the past 15 years or so). I'm guessing the guys that dominated the middleweight division in the '40s and '50s are playing tailback, wide receiver, cornerback, and pointguard. I know that Jones was a good enough athlete to play in Europe, but what about the NBA or NFL? That's the caliber athlete that was dominating boxing in the '40s and '50s, in my opinion. Add to that natural ability the toughness and hunger that came from having to fight to survive and I can't see Roy Jones hanging with the top guys very often at all. Not to mention, Roy Jones lives like a spoiled athlete, there's no way he could compete with the hard, hard drinking, hard working men of yesterday.

Yes, the talent is way down in boxing because participation is way down, and investment in developng boxers is way down. The amatuer program in the US is nearing death, and while participation in some foreign countries is increasing many, other foreign countries are also experiencing steep declines in overall participation.

[dempseyfire]

That's a good question, ok now, lets look at who was some of the top mw in the 40's & 50's;
ok you got Robinson, Tiger, Olson, Lamotta, Mims, there maybe a few more I left out, with that being said; Roy would be very dominant in that era, with just a hand few that I would say make Roy think. Just like Sugar Ray, Roy had too much speed for most of them guys, they would have never knew what it them.

You are treating Roy like some sort of superman. If he was such in a class by himself, he would've never struggled with the pretty ordinary Montell Griffith.

For starters, this era had many VERY VERY fast handed guys. Roy's speed would not look special vs a Robinson, Burley, or even a George Benton. Also, correct pacing over 15 rounds and timing punches beat out natural speed all day, things that the fighters of that era were masters at. Guys like Tiger (who, and I love Glen Johnson, was twice the fighter Johnson ever was) beat faster opponents all the time via good timing and constant pressure. Roy would be in over his head. The likes of Glen Kelly would've never been headlining fight cards let alone championship contenders in the 40s-60s.

Can he compete? Sure, Roy could beat the likes of Olson, Graziano, and Turpin (but it'd be a very tough fight) . .maybe even Giardello due to the style matchup.

Cerdan, Burley, Robinson, Fullmer, Tiger . . .they run him down over 15 rounds. I think a very interesting fight would actually be Jones Jr vs Rubin Carter.

[big train express]

old school fighters are overrated. athletes evolve. i compare rocky marciano to arturo gatti

[The Great John L]

old school fighters are overrated. athletes evolve. i compare rocky marciano to arturo gatti

Yes, and if any top athletes actually participated in boxing anymore I think just about everyone would agree with you. Unfortunately, the cream can't rise to the top when there is no cream in the cup.

[Robinson]

wow....bxing talent is down because it is less popular in the USA.

Oh my goodness, since when was boxing strictly an American sport.

Boxing is doomed because less Yanks are putting on gloves, boxing
lacks talent because all the athletes are learning other sports..

Boxing is more than ever popular in Europe and in the former Soviet
republics, it is still popular in the UK. It has a growing popularity in
China and the Asias.

Here in Oz like the USA it has dropped off. We can see how few US
champions and stars their are globally compared to the past for
two reasons...the rest of the world is interested in the sport and
because the sport has factionalised so that their is no sole title.

And unlike in the past, a journeyman can survive in this sport, just
by being a boxer these days. Let alone contenders and champions.
In the past, even champions at lower classes had to work day jobs
as well as train. Being a 100% fighter is a BIG thing. Not having to
share time, energy and effort with a day job is a huge thing.
The money is their now so fighters can be just fighters.

This may not be as important as being a farm hand or cow boy by
day though...I mean those guys are alot tougher and fitter than a
pro athlete.

I think RJJ is a tremendous talent, a supreme boxing machine, if
you grabbed him at his best and sent him to another era, he would
look just as dominant.

[dempseyfire]

wow....bxing talent is down because it is less popular in the USA.

Oh my goodness, since when was boxing strictly an American sport.

Boxing is doomed because less Yanks are putting on gloves, boxing
lacks talent because all the athletes are learning other sports..

Boxing is more than ever popular in Europe and in the former Soviet
republics, it is still popular in the UK. It has a growing popularity in
China and the Asias.

Here in Oz like the USA it has dropped off. We can see how few US
champions and stars their are globally compared to the past for
two reasons...the rest of the world is interested in the sport and
because the sport has factionalised so that their is no sole title.

And unlike in the past, a journeyman can survive in this sport, just
by being a boxer these days. Let alone contenders and champions.
In the past, even champions at lower classes had to work day jobs
as well as train. Being a 100% fighter is a BIG thing. Not having to
share time, energy and effort with a day job is a huge thing.
The money is their now so fighters can be just fighters.

This may not be as important as being a farm hand or cow boy by
day though...I mean those guys are alot tougher and fitter than a
pro athlete.

I think RJJ is a tremendous talent, a supreme boxing machine, if
you grabbed him at his best and sent him to another era, he would
look just as dominant.

Rob, you are dead wrong on a number of points.

First, off . .boxing being bigger BUSINESS than ever in Germany . . .probably yes. More popular in Europe than it's ever been? Not even close!!!! Boxing has taken a serious nosedive across Europe just as it has in the United States. In the UK you still have interest but compared to even the early 90s there's been a serious drop-off. And it's overall participation has actually fallen in the former Soviet countries b/c kids are no longer forced/placed into the amateur boxing programs like the Klitschkos were. If the K brothers had been born 10 years later, they would've gone to basketball I guarantee you.

Also, if you think modern day journeyman can survive alone on boxing wages, you are sorely mistaken! All of them work other jobs. Hell, Roy himself fought a cop and a firemen!!!! Boxing is NOT a good business to get into unless you are AT least a top contender and even then the investment (by your management) will only pay off if you win a major fight/title. The biggest stars are paid more than ever b/c of the premium networks and PPV but the vast majority get jack, b/c the big big money left boxing a long time ago for other sports.

[Ambling Alp]

Robbie-Have actually seen some of these guys fight? I'm guessing you have seen Robinson?
You don't think Robinson was a talented as Jones?
Have you seen him fight LaMotta, Turpin,Fullmer, Basilio etc.? (Or these guys in other fights as well)
Those guys knew how to fight, fought at an incredible pace, and were tough as nails.

No, the 1950's weren't great in every weight class.
However, the 1950's was probably the best decade ever for middleweights. (For that matter, the late 1940's and the 1960's were really good as well)

Jones isn't just going to skate on by like he did in most of career against severely overmatched opponents. Speed and reflexes alone isn't enough to beat those guys. He would be getting hit; those guys just didn't let up.

[bjermaine]

That's a good question, ok now, lets look at who was some of the top mw in the 40's & 50's;
ok you got Robinson, Tiger, Olson, Lamotta, Mims, there maybe a few more I left out, with that being said; Roy would be very dominant in that era, with just a hand few that I would say make Roy think. Just like Sugar Ray, Roy had too much speed for most of them guys, they would have never knew what it them.

You are treating Roy like some sort of superman. If he was such in a class by himself, he would've never struggled with the pretty ordinary Montell Griffith.

For starters, this era had many VERY VERY fast handed guys. Roy's speed would not look special vs a Robinson, Burley, or even a George Benton. Also, correct pacing over 15 rounds and timing punches beat out natural speed all day, things that the fighters of that era were masters at. Guys like Tiger (who, and I love Glen Johnson, was twice the fighter Johnson ever was) beat faster opponents all the time via good timing and constant pressure. Roy would be in over his head. The likes of Glen Kelly would've never been headlining fight cards let alone championship contenders in the 40s-60s.

Can he compete? Sure, Roy could beat the likes of Olson, Graziano, and Turpin (but it'd be a very tough fight) . .maybe even Giardello due to the style matchup.

Cerdan, Burley, Robinson, Fullmer, Tiger . . .they run him down over 15 rounds. I think a very interesting fight would actually be Jones Jr vs Rubin Carter.

you point to jones' losses late in his career on why he would lose to the fighters you listed. what about the losses of the other fighters? you act like these guys were never beat. jones' speed, size and smarts would be too much.

yes jones looked like crap in the first griffin fight but griffin still won that fight laid out on the canvas. don't know if you saw the rematch. i know he wasn't fighting an all-time great that night but it was his most impressive performance imo. too bad holyfield wouldn't fight jones back in '97. would have liked to seen that one.

[dempseyfire]

That's a good question, ok now, lets look at who was some of the top mw in the 40's & 50's;
ok you got Robinson, Tiger, Olson, Lamotta, Mims, there maybe a few more I left out, with that being said; Roy would be very dominant in that era, with just a hand few that I would say make Roy think. Just like Sugar Ray, Roy had too much speed for most of them guys, they would have never knew what it them.

You are treating Roy like some sort of superman. If he was such in a class by himself, he would've never struggled with the pretty ordinary Montell Griffith.

For starters, this era had many VERY VERY fast handed guys. Roy's speed would not look special vs a Robinson, Burley, or even a George Benton. Also, correct pacing over 15 rounds and timing punches beat out natural speed all day, things that the fighters of that era were masters at. Guys like Tiger (who, and I love Glen Johnson, was twice the fighter Johnson ever was) beat faster opponents all the time via good timing and constant pressure. Roy would be in over his head. The likes of Glen Kelly would've never been headlining fight cards let alone championship contenders in the 40s-60s.

Can he compete? Sure, Roy could beat the likes of Olson, Graziano, and Turpin (but it'd be a very tough fight) . .maybe even Giardello due to the style matchup.

Cerdan, Burley, Robinson, Fullmer, Tiger . . .they run him down over 15 rounds. I think a very interesting fight would actually be Jones Jr vs Rubin Carter.

you point to jones' losses late in his career on why he would lose to the fighters you listed. what about the losses of the other fighters? you act like these guys were never beat. jones' speed, size and smarts would be too much.

yes jones looked like crap in the first griffin fight but griffin still won that fight laid out on the canvas. don't know if you saw the rematch. i know he wasn't fighting an all-time great that night but it was his most impressive performance imo. too bad holyfield wouldn't fight jones back in '97. would have liked to seen that one.

Maybe the fact that Roy would've NEVER had the stones to face Evander tells you something of his chances in that bout. My God he backed down from a proposed fight against an old fat Buster Douglas during that same time period!

The fact that you list Roy's "smarts" as being a huge plus vs the likes of Robinson, Moore, Burley etc. just tells it all really. I won't even argue.

[bjermaine]

dempseyfire, you don't have a clue. roy is one of the smartest and talented fighters ever to step in the ring.

thank you for also telling us that jones could have beaten bobo olson and joey giardello.

[dempseyfire]

dempseyfire, you don't have a clue. roy is one of the smartest and talented fighters ever to step in the ring.

thank you for also telling us that jones could have beaten bobo olson and joey giardello.

If smart means being able to get an HBO contract which allows you to price out of fights vs more dangerous fighters while having PPVs vs the Glen Kellys of the world, then we are on the same page!

[Ezzard]

Dick Tiger, what a fighter... Too strong and relentless for MW Jones.

Problem here is that we're trying to compare a guy who side-stepped the best of a weaker era, so as to dominate people who weren't that good. A movement like Roycott would simply never have happened back then, and that tells you a lot about the man.

Roy's fans are watching him beat up Pazienza and thinking he can do that to other great fighters at 160. He can't.

He wasn't the finished article at 160. And he doesn't make a 175 top 10.

Put him in that era and he wins more than he loses but he doesn't dominate and he doesn't come top of the heap.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

He wasn't the finished article at 160. And he doesn't make a 175 top 10.

--- Roy Ibro 10th ranked all time lightheavy and 15th ranked middle.

Bunch of old cigar chompin' farts have no preference of putting a mouthy, flashy hiphopper in such elite company save they recognize talent and achievements.

If you go look at any list of great fighters, plenty are not the finished article in their weight classes if they are division climbers. Roy/Tyson fans always tended to ignore every flaw and overrate their favorite, whereas their critics tend to only focus on their flaws and dismiss achievements as an aberration of no merit.

Griffin was a fine fighter, undefeated and gives any LH in history plenty of problems and beats plenty. He was the only fighter to hold Roy close until the Tarver match where Roy's massive ego had reached the bursting point after the Ruiz win. Compare to SR Leonard who had his buttocks well battered by finished article Duran and his face carved up like a pumpkin by unfinished article Hearns at the start of his prime. SRL touted as an alltime p4p boxer/puncher on the strength of a much more modest career.

Roy can live well in the 40s/50s and would have some spectacular performances and upsets, but not the flashy perfection he had in this era with careful development in a weakened era. I would say he's maybe the most gifted fighter I can think of and never reached full potential because of the ego that told him it was OK to coast down the stretch of his career when he should've prepared for the aging process better. He still oozes talent, it's his mojo that he's lost and can't find anymore.

[Goodnight, Irene]

"Put him in that era and he wins more than he loses but he doesn't dominate and he doesn't come top of the heap." - Ezzard

Is it just me, or does this opinion seem to be directly proportional to the knowledge of the sport's history? Seems on most boards, the less familiar someone is with the past, the more invincible they believe Jones is.

[The Great John L]

wow....bxing talent is down because it is less popular in the USA.

Oh my goodness, since when was boxing strictly an American sport.

I didn't say it was Einstein. Total global participation in boxing is down dramatically from 30+ years ago. There are a few countries where participation has increased in the past few decades, but the sport as a whole has basically fallen off the map of major sports. It's great that you are a boxing fan, because we need everyone we can get, but your limited understanding of the sports history clearly shows in your posts.

[The Great John L]

Boxing is more than ever popular in Europe and in the former Soviet
republics, it is still popular in the UK. It has a growing popularity in
China and the Asias.

More popular than ever in Europe? Germany perhaps, but virtually everywhere else in Europe it's popularity has declined. And actually I would say that there are fewer German fighters now than in the 60's, it's just that they've imported East Euro fighters.

And yes, there is some growth in the far east, but as noted by a post in the Current scene, the number of boxing shows in Japan have been growing so that now they are approaching the number held in the country in the early 60's. A good sign for the sport, but one of the very few good signs. I think Latin America is probably another healthy area.

And if you believe that boxing is more popular in the former Soviet states, then you are even more ill infomred than I thought. Of course there are more professional boxers from these areas, because in the past the fighters weren't allowed to turn pro. However, the boxing programs in these countries are also falling apart due to the fact that they no longer get the huge influx of state dollars that they got during Soviet years. And there are hardly massive numbers of top fighters coming out of the former Soviet states. In fact, there are less active Russian HWs listed in boxrec than we had fighting in Ohio back in the 60's.