nobby_nobbins wrote:I don't expect anyone to agree with me but I've always though a prime Calzaghe would have beaten a prime Jones Jnr. Calzaghe was just as fast, had terrific power before his hands went and had a workrate that would have drowned Jones. Joe would also have matched Jones for swagger and big fight mentality. Such a shame that he didn't do what was necessary to make fights like this happen.
Calzaghe could do waht he did because his opponents allowed him to do so. You could see in the Hopkins fight how Bernard mastered Calzaghe for the first six rounds before he began to tire and Calzaghe came back at him for the second half of the fight, losing by one round IMO. That was too an old Bernard Hopkins, which puts Calzaghe's opponents in proper perspective. Jones would have been too much for Calzaghe and would have played with him for 12 rounds and possibly stopped him in the later rounds. Calzaghe did have some speed, but Jones's speed and reflexes and sheer all round ability would been too much for Calzaghe. I think people look too much into Calzaghe's victories over Hopkins and Jones as old men, when in reality his best victory was against Mikkel Kessler, a very good fighter, but not the best out there at any time.
Agreed, Joe was fast but no where near as fast as Roy. Roy's handspeed is probably the quickest iv ever seen. Kessler, and Lacy were his best fights, i never entertain the Eubank, Jones, or Hopkins fights as all 3 were way past there best (even though i had Hopkins nicking it by 1 pt) and lets not forget how Joe ducked Johnson, what was it? 3 times he pulled out of fighting him?
loaded_gloves wrote:If McClellan couldnt decapatate Benn i dont think its guaranteed Jackson could have done it. He also got sparked in two by mccallum, watson went 11 rounds with him and eubank ended watsons career.
.
If Benn would have been stopped in the first like he should have been, you wouldn't be saying that. Plus we all know McClellan had his health issues and faded, Benn also should have been stopped in the 8th, he was gone then too.
Jackson was just relentless and before he was totally past it he got stopped by two beasts, plus says a lot that it took one of the toughest fighters in history (McCallum) to stand up to Jackson's shots. Benn is not in the same league as those guys, there were loads of fighters who could stand up to his power and we all know he was leaky and could be knocked over. I could just see Jackson walking through him, he threw faster crisper shots than McClellan and would just be endlessly landing on Benn whose stalking, open style would just play right into the Hawk's hands.
I really would have loved to see Hawk/Eubank. Chris could get lazy and that's a recipe for disaster against Jackson.
Jackson was a monster puncher and had the ability to win a fight he was losing with big punches ala Herol Bomber Graham but i dont think he was on the same level as the big boys im afraid. Eubank certainly would have been favourite style wise, i can see the argument for it being a toss up with Benn due to his open come forwards style but Jackson got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop the top british guys never did. Watson and Collins lost against the top americans and in collins case not as his prime but they didnt get banged out in 1 or 2 rounds like jackson did. Id argue McCallums chin was no better than Eubanks.
nobby_nobbins wrote:I don't expect anyone to agree with me but I've always though a prime Calzaghe would have beaten a prime Jones Jnr. Calzaghe was just as fast, had terrific power before his hands went and had a workrate that would have drowned Jones. Joe would also have matched Jones for swagger and big fight mentality. Such a shame that he didn't do what was necessary to make fights like this happen.
Calzaghe could do waht he did because his opponents allowed him to do so. You could see in the Hopkins fight how Bernard mastered Calzaghe for the first six rounds before he began to tire and Calzaghe came back at him for the second half of the fight, losing by one round IMO. That was too an old Bernard Hopkins, which puts Calzaghe's opponents in proper perspective. Jones would have been too much for Calzaghe and would have played with him for 12 rounds and possibly stopped him in the later rounds. Calzaghe did have some speed, but Jones's speed and reflexes and sheer all round ability would been too much for Calzaghe. I think people look too much into Calzaghe's victories over Hopkins and Jones as old men, when in reality his best victory was against Mikkel Kessler, a very good fighter, but not the best out there at any time.
Agreed, Joe was fast but no where near as fast as Roy. Roy's handspeed is probably the quickest iv ever seen. Kessler, and Lacy were his best fights, i never entertain the Eubank, Jones, or Hopkins fights as all 3 were way past there best (even though i had Hopkins nicking it by 1 pt) and lets not forget how Joe ducked Johnson, what was it? 3 times he pulled out of fighting him?
i find the idea calzaghe could have beaten Jones laughable. Styles make fights, and Jones at 168 was a phneomenon. Would Jones have struggled with Kessler, of course not. Outisde of the two sugar rays and ali, nobody had faster hands or reflexes.
If Benn would have been stopped in the first like he should have been, you wouldn't be saying that. Plus we all know McClellan had his health issues and faded, Benn also should have been stopped in the 8th, he was gone then too.
Jackson was just relentless and before he was totally past it he got stopped by two beasts, plus says a lot that it took one of the toughest fighters in history (McCallum) to stand up to Jackson's shots. Benn is not in the same league as those guys, there were loads of fighters who could stand up to his power and we all know he was leaky and could be knocked over. I could just see Jackson walking through him, he threw faster crisper shots than McClellan and would just be endlessly landing on Benn whose stalking, open style would just play right into the Hawk's hands.
I really would have loved to see Hawk/Eubank. Chris could get lazy and that's a recipe for disaster against Jackson.
Jackson was a monster puncher and had the ability to win a fight he was losing with big punches ala Herol Bomber Graham but i dont think he was on the same level as the big boys im afraid. Eubank certainly would have been favourite style wise, i can see the argument for it being a toss up with Benn due to his open come forwards style but Jackson got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop the top british guys never did. Watson and Collins lost against the top americans and in collins case not as his prime but they didnt get banged out in 1 or 2 rounds like jackson did. Id argue McCallums chin was no better than Eubanks.
eubank had a monster chin and even more so powers of recovery, he was absolutely exhausted and blistzed by Watson and got off the floor to skull him, Eubank is one of the toughest men to ever enter the ring, yes, of course, Jackson may have iced him, but I think it unlikely, Eubank was not fragile in any sense of the word
It was only after the end of his career that I really appreciated Eubank's considerable talant.
I remember his career largely for the 8 fight 10 million deal that he signed with Sky where he fought frequently and generally against second tier opposition.
It was only in the twighlight of his career when he faced Calzaghe and Thompsn that he really showed his warrior streak.
When threatened as against Benn or more tragicly Michael Watson he showed a resilence and determination that was exemplory. However for large sections of his reign he was happy to tread water and do just enough to win.
His excellent biograpohy does confirm that he wanted no part of RJJ and at that stage of his career, nobody could have beaten Jones.
Regarding the IQ issue- that is very difficult to comprehend, although you could admire the smart business of the deal that he struck with Sky that consumned most of their boxing budget for the period, he has invested in some very daft schemes such as the refurbishment of Brighton Pier that gave rise to his virtual bankrucy. He also destroyed any career as a commentator by a reference to oral sex on air. If actions like that give you an IQ of 180, I am happy to be thick.
Quixall wrote:
Calzaghe could do waht he did because his opponents allowed him to do so. You could see in the Hopkins fight how Bernard mastered Calzaghe for the first six rounds before he began to tire and Calzaghe came back at him for the second half of the fight, losing by one round IMO. That was too an old Bernard Hopkins, which puts Calzaghe's opponents in proper perspective. Jones would have been too much for Calzaghe and would have played with him for 12 rounds and possibly stopped him in the later rounds. Calzaghe did have some speed, but Jones's speed and reflexes and sheer all round ability would been too much for Calzaghe. I think people look too much into Calzaghe's victories over Hopkins and Jones as old men, when in reality his best victory was against Mikkel Kessler, a very good fighter, but not the best out there at any time.
Agreed, Joe was fast but no where near as fast as Roy. Roy's handspeed is probably the quickest iv ever seen. Kessler, and Lacy were his best fights, i never entertain the Eubank, Jones, or Hopkins fights as all 3 were way past there best (even though i had Hopkins nicking it by 1 pt) and lets not forget how Joe ducked Johnson, what was it? 3 times he pulled out of fighting him?
i find the idea calzaghe could have beaten Jones laughable. Styles make fights, and Jones at 168 was a phneomenon. Would Jones have struggled with Kessler, of course not. Outisde of the two sugar rays and ali, nobody had faster hands or reflexes.
Agreed. iv got RJJ career fights on dvd, and when i watch him at his peak it gives me goose bums. Certainly one of , if not the most talented fighter to ever grace a boxing ring.
kingfinn wrote:
Jackson was a monster puncher and had the ability to win a fight he was losing with big punches ala Herol Bomber Graham but i dont think he was on the same level as the big boys im afraid. Eubank certainly would have been favourite style wise, i can see the argument for it being a toss up with Benn due to his open come forwards style but Jackson got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop the top british guys never did. Watson and Collins lost against the top americans and in collins case not as his prime but they didnt get banged out in 1 or 2 rounds like jackson did. Id argue McCallums chin was no better than Eubanks.
You're right, Jackson wasn't on the same level as the 'big boys' - but Benn and Eubank were NOT the 'big boys'. You say the the 'top British guys' never got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop - but they didn't face the cream of the crop aside from Benn in one fight (that involved Benn rabbit punching his way to a 'win' against a war ravaged Gman on rabid home turf in a fight he should have lost if not in the first then in the eighth. Tell me Benn wins that fight on US soil vs a healthy McCellan).
The cream of the crop in or around the weight was Jones, Toney, Hopkins, McCallum. Benn and Eubank were on the second tier level with the likes of Jackson, Frankie Liles, Reggie Johnson etc.
Strange - I don't recall Hopkins being considered any cream of the crop when he was a novice, or when he eventually fought with Jones and both put in very disappointing performances, or later on when he was punched out of the ring by Mercardo.
McCallum was considered an old, blown-up boxing master - Watson was favored to beat him and the Benn-Watson fight was chosen by American TV over the Graham-McCallum fight which wasn't shown.
Toney after the Barkley performance yes, he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker. But before that certainly not. 6'4" southpaw lefty Nunn until the Toney KO (in a fight he was dominating), yeah - he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker.
Jones in '95 - yeah. He was the cream.
Jackson turned the Eubank fight down remember, in early 1990, for the vacant WBC title; because he 'didn't know enough about him' and later after the Graham KO was out for a while having eye operations. Liles didn't come into the picture until late (and nobody really cared about him)....Reggie Johnson-he was as slick as a greaseball back then but I thought both Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat him.
coghaugen11 wrote:Strange - I don't recall Hopkins being considered any cream of the crop when he was a novice, or when he eventually fought with Jones and both put in very disappointing performances, or later on when he was punched out of the ring by Mercardo.
McCallum was considered an old, blown-up boxing master - Watson was favored to beat him and the Benn-Watson fight was chosen by American TV over the Graham-McCallum fight which wasn't shown.
Toney after the Barkley performance yes, he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker. But before that certainly not. 6'4" southpaw lefty Nunn until the Toney KO (in a fight he was dominating), yeah - he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker.
Jones in '95 - yeah. He was the cream.
Jackson turned the Eubank fight down remember, in early 1990, for the vacant WBC title; because he 'didn't know enough about him' and later after the Graham KO was out for a while having eye operations. Liles didn't come into the picture until late (and nobody really cared about him)....Reggie Johnson-he was as slick as a greaseball back then but I thought both Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat him.
Outside America, Chris Eubank was the star.
Why all the pointless nitpicking? I was just making the extremely non controversial point in response to Kingfinn that the Benns and Eubanks were a level below the Joneses and Hopkinseses. I wasn't about to meticulously dissect which years certain guys were at their best and how that corresponds with the exact years other guy beats so-and-so, as you seem to be doing.
You look like you're trying to assert that the aforementioned Brit crop were elite level, so lol, good game on that one, but most educated boxing fans will just disagree with you.
loaded_gloves wrote:Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat Reggie Johnson? Good God, I don't trust your judging skills. Wow!
Oh dear. Lamar clearly sweeped rounds 4 to 10 with heavier scoring shots. And Collins sweeped the first three, the middle three and the last two, though I admit that Reggie had a great 10th round in which he looked like a southpaw version of a peak Roy Jones.
coghaugen11 wrote:Strange - I don't recall Hopkins being considered any cream of the crop when he was a novice, or when he eventually fought with Jones and both put in very disappointing performances, or later on when he was punched out of the ring by Mercardo.
McCallum was considered an old, blown-up boxing master - Watson was favored to beat him and the Benn-Watson fight was chosen by American TV over the Graham-McCallum fight which wasn't shown.
Toney after the Barkley performance yes, he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker. But before that certainly not. 6'4" southpaw lefty Nunn until the Toney KO (in a fight he was dominating), yeah - he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker.
Jones in '95 - yeah. He was the cream.
Jackson turned the Eubank fight down remember, in early 1990, for the vacant WBC title; because he 'didn't know enough about him' and later after the Graham KO was out for a while having eye operations. Liles didn't come into the picture until late (and nobody really cared about him)....Reggie Johnson-he was as slick as a greaseball back then but I thought both Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat him.
Outside America, Chris Eubank was the star.
Why all the pointless nitpicking? I was just making the extremely non controversial point in response to Kingfinn that the Benns and Eubanks were a level below the Joneses and Hopkinseses. I wasn't about to meticulously dissect which years certain guys were at their best and how that corresponds with the exact years other guy beats so-and-so, as you seem to be doing.
You look like you're trying to assert that the aforementioned Brit crop were elite level, so lol, good game on that one, but most educated boxing fans will just disagree with you.
In 100 years time, people will make their own minds up regarding Eubank, Graham, Calzaghe etc.
PS
What exactly is the objective definition of 'elite level'?
loaded_gloves wrote:Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat Reggie Johnson? Good God, I don't trust your judging skills. Wow!
Oh dear. Lamar clearly sweeped rounds 4 to 10 with heavier scoring shots. And Collins sweeped the first three, the middle three and the last two, though I admit that Reggie had a great 10th round in which he looked like a southpaw version of a peak Roy Jones.
loaded_gloves wrote:Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat Reggie Johnson? Good God, I don't trust your judging skills. Wow!
Oh dear. Lamar clearly sweeped rounds 4 to 10 with heavier scoring shots. And Collins sweeped the first three, the middle three and the last two, though I admit that Reggie had a great 10th round in which he looked like a southpaw version of a peak Roy Jones.
Can someone ban this boring troll. Bore off!
Why don't you watch the fights for your first time and meticulously break down the scoring for us....
coghaugen11 wrote:
Oh dear. Lamar clearly sweeped rounds 4 to 10 with heavier scoring shots. And Collins sweeped the first three, the middle three and the last two, though I admit that Reggie had a great 10th round in which he looked like a southpaw version of a peak Roy Jones.
Can someone ban this boring troll. Bore off!
Why don't you watch the fights for your first time and meticulously break down the scoring for us....
No thanks - got anything to say about boxing today?
I was a big Reggie fan but I was a bigger Kidfire Parks fan - that guy always kept his hands high, always used a heavy stiff jab, had very heavy blows at pinpoint accuracy and could shoeshine with the best of 'em, too; never slapped. He looked so well-schooled for a guy in his early 20s and could've possibly beaten G-Man, certainly. I think Reggie Johnson could've beaten Roy Jones back then.
He goes round numerous websites, starts the exact same topic, then periodically revisits and bumps them back up every few days. He knows nor cares about boxing and thus there is an agenda.
coghaugen11 wrote:Strange - I don't recall Hopkins being considered any cream of the crop when he was a novice, or when he eventually fought with Jones and both put in very disappointing performances, or later on when he was punched out of the ring by Mercardo.
McCallum was considered an old, blown-up boxing master - Watson was favored to beat him and the Benn-Watson fight was chosen by American TV over the Graham-McCallum fight which wasn't shown.
Toney after the Barkley performance yes, he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker. But before that certainly not. 6'4" southpaw lefty Nunn until the Toney KO (in a fight he was dominating), yeah - he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker.
Jones in '95 - yeah. He was the cream.
Jackson turned the Eubank fight down remember, in early 1990, for the vacant WBC title; because he 'didn't know enough about him' and later after the Graham KO was out for a while having eye operations. Liles didn't come into the picture until late (and nobody really cared about him)....Reggie Johnson-he was as slick as a greaseball back then but I thought both Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat him.
Outside America, Chris Eubank was the star.
Why all the pointless nitpicking? I was just making the extremely non controversial point in response to Kingfinn that the Benns and Eubanks were a level below the Joneses and Hopkinseses. I wasn't about to meticulously dissect which years certain guys were at their best and how that corresponds with the exact years other guy beats so-and-so, as you seem to be doing.
You look like you're trying to assert that the aforementioned Brit crop were elite level, so lol, good game on that one, but most educated boxing fans will just disagree with you.
At no point were either Benn or Eubank considered the best at 168, simple as.
kingfinn wrote:
Jackson was a monster puncher and had the ability to win a fight he was losing with big punches ala Herol Bomber Graham but i dont think he was on the same level as the big boys im afraid. Eubank certainly would have been favourite style wise, i can see the argument for it being a toss up with Benn due to his open come forwards style but Jackson got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop the top british guys never did. Watson and Collins lost against the top americans and in collins case not as his prime but they didnt get banged out in 1 or 2 rounds like jackson did. Id argue McCallums chin was no better than Eubanks.
You're right, Jackson wasn't on the same level as the 'big boys' - but Benn and Eubank were NOT the 'big boys'. You say the the 'top British guys' never got demolished when stepping up to the cream of the crop - but they didn't face the cream of the crop aside from Benn in one fight (that involved Benn rabbit punching his way to a 'win' against a war ravaged Gman on rabid home turf in a fight he should have lost if not in the first then in the eighth. Tell me Benn wins that fight on US soil vs a healthy McCellan).
The cream of the crop in or around the weight was Jones, Toney, Hopkins, McCallum. Benn and Eubank were on the second tier level with the likes of Jackson, Frankie Liles, Reggie Johnson etc.
I disagree, you make excuses for why the US fighters lost their fights but the fact is they lost. Eubank was one of the top boys his downfall was that he was british and didnt have a massive desire to make a name for himself world wide, also after the Watson tragedy tended to coast to a win. I very much doubt he wanted to fight RJJ, but at the same token i dont recall any of the US fighters volunteering to get in the ring with Eubank. Watson went 11 rounds with McCallum, Steve Collins went the distance before he was even at his peak, and graham lost a split decision. Eubank was the best of the bunch in the UK; i fail to see how he is then put in the same catagory as man that got sparked by McCallum in 2 rounds.
coghaugen11 wrote:Strange - I don't recall Hopkins being considered any cream of the crop when he was a novice, or when he eventually fought with Jones and both put in very disappointing performances, or later on when he was punched out of the ring by Mercardo.
McCallum was considered an old, blown-up boxing master - Watson was favored to beat him and the Benn-Watson fight was chosen by American TV over the Graham-McCallum fight which wasn't shown.
Toney after the Barkley performance yes, he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker. But before that certainly not. 6'4" southpaw lefty Nunn until the Toney KO (in a fight he was dominating), yeah - he was the cream of boxing ahead of Whitaker.
Jones in '95 - yeah. He was the cream.
Jackson turned the Eubank fight down remember, in early 1990, for the vacant WBC title; because he 'didn't know enough about him' and later after the Graham KO was out for a while having eye operations. Liles didn't come into the picture until late (and nobody really cared about him)....Reggie Johnson-he was as slick as a greaseball back then but I thought both Steve Collins and Lamar Parks beat him.
Outside America, Chris Eubank was the star.
Why all the pointless nitpicking? I was just making the extremely non controversial point in response to Kingfinn that the Benns and Eubanks were a level below the Joneses and Hopkinseses. I wasn't about to meticulously dissect which years certain guys were at their best and how that corresponds with the exact years other guy beats so-and-so, as you seem to be doing.
You look like you're trying to assert that the aforementioned Brit crop were elite level, so lol, good game on that one, but most educated boxing fans will just disagree with you.
At no point were either Benn or Eubank considered the best at 168, simple as.
I thought all four of them - Eubank, Nunn, Toney, Jones - were about equal best. But Jones really looked out of this world against Pazienza!
To be fair, Jackson was stopped prematurely on his feet against McCallum - it was bogus, especially since McCallum was out on his feet in the first round.
Eubank made his desire to fight Nunn or Toney very clear in late '92/early '93, but Bob Arum stated clearly that he wouldn't let Nunn or Toney fight him because Eubank would make them look bad on US PPV.
