Who wins this match at 160?
I pick Ray Robinson 10 out of 10 every time.
Some think otherwise.
Who wins and why?
Ray Robinson vs. Roy Jones
RJJ vs Robinson
At 160, I'll pick RJJ. He was an "in-and-out" fighter. Much quicker than Robinson ever faced. Robinson was a bad-ass at Welter. Jones was a bad-ass at Middle.
I could see RJJ with his "praying-Mantis" stance blocking alot of Robinson's shot as he tries to come in. Then popping him as he dances away. Jones - too quick, too mobile for the great Sugar Ray- at 160.
I could see RJJ with his "praying-Mantis" stance blocking alot of Robinson's shot as he tries to come in. Then popping him as he dances away. Jones - too quick, too mobile for the great Sugar Ray- at 160.
wlvrne makes a great point. robinson had already established himself as one of the greatest ever when he was a welterweight, but he was not as dominate at middle as most would think. the reason he won the middleweight belt so much is because he kept losing it. the fighters that beat him at that weight,Basillio,Fullmer,Turpin and Tiger Jones, were not on the level of Roy Jones. Sure, Ray beat 3 of them in returns but the fact that they beat him in the first place is telling. P4P Ray is better than jones no question in my mind. But at middle weight I think jones could outpoint him most of the time.
-
tiredoldngrey
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 442
- Joined: 23 May 2005, 12:36
I agree that, as a MW, Robinson was not whatr he had been, certainly not after the near three year rest after the Maxim fight, but I still don't see RJJ beating him. Basilio, Fullmer, etc were all tough solid fighters and they each would've at the very least, tried RJJ to his core in a 15 rounder.
The fight between Hopkins and RJJ proved nothing to me except that, in 1940, they would have both been fighting 6 rounders in clubs in NY. Robinson proved his talent time and again against guys that we know about and can measure in terms of history; RJJ hasn't. Robinson by ko.
The fight between Hopkins and RJJ proved nothing to me except that, in 1940, they would have both been fighting 6 rounders in clubs in NY. Robinson proved his talent time and again against guys that we know about and can measure in terms of history; RJJ hasn't. Robinson by ko.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
robinson was one of the best middleweights of all time pre retirement. that night he took out jake la motta he was deadly, and then he beat turpin in a rematch , graziano, and bobo olsen, robinsons was only 29 and he was still in his prime.
i dont think roy jones could beat the middleweight robinson 1950-52. after that yes.
i dont think roy jones could beat the middleweight robinson 1950-52. after that yes.
I think the tired old and grey one said it best,Robinson is often thought of as the middleweight who fought great battles with Fullmer,Basilio,and so on but that wasn't the prime 160 Robinson.A great quote from Montell Griffin,"Jones don't want no problems".Robinson,pre Maxim,and even after,would give Roy more problems than he could imagine.Robinson grew into the 160 pound division,he wasn't merely a blown up welter.Jones' speed and defense would surely cause Robinson problems early on but sooner or later Robinson would connect and then we'd find out why Roy spent his entire career never wanting to get hit.
re
Roy Jones, 8 out of 10...Robinson was the greatest ever when he fought at welterweight, but after he moved up to 160 he was still great, but a lot more ordinary,while at 175 he just couldn't handle, or I think that he would have tried more than once. I rank Robinson at #1, tied with Henry Armstrong, but not at 160.
Re: re
Barrybarry wrote:Roy Jones, 8 out of 10...Robinson was the greatest ever when he fought at welterweight, but after he moved up to 160 he was still great, but a lot more ordinary,while at 175 he just couldn't handle, or I think that he would have tried more than once. I rank Robinson at #1, tied with Henry Armstrong, but not at 160.
I was waiting to hear from you on this one as I know you rate Jones highly. I know what people mean about Robinson at Middle but I still think he's a top 5 all-time Middle and would win this fight. Anyway, that's not what I'm posting for. I'm interested to know what you think of Roy going up against Monzon and Hagler. I respect your opinion Barry, even when I don't agree with you.
I can see both winning, on the one hand Jones was faster, a little more accurate and harder to hit, but on the other Jones never fought anyone like Robinson, Jones' constant feints often made the other guy afraid to throw a punch at him, I don't think that'd happen with Robinson who didn't fear anybody's power, I can see Jones doing well but Robinson switching from matador to bull and raining punches at Jones whose footwork, stamina, power and punch resistance were not as good as Robinsons.
I think however many times they fought Robinson would win more, simply because he was superb at figuring an opponent out, as attested to by his record in rematches.
I think however many times they fought Robinson would win more, simply because he was superb at figuring an opponent out, as attested to by his record in rematches.
re
Well I am a big supporter of Jones, even when he gets knocked completely cold, of which I don't try to make any excuses except that he is over the hill. As to Jones facing Monzon and Hagler all in their prime...I'd have to go with Jones because of his speed, hitting power at 160 and his ability to not get hit.
I know Hagler and Monzon were both bulls, but Jones was a different breed than any that either fought. He not only had the power to keep them honest, but also the ability to dance away and stay out of reach of any rushing tactics and in his prime I don't see anyone being able to cut the ring off Jones as he could make anyone trying very sorry with probably the fastest hands that I have ever seen and as I said before at 160 Jones was a viscous puncher. I doubt that he could have stopped either man because they both were the kind of fighter that just simply would not go down and they both were just as excellent boxers as they were bulls, Monzon probably a little better than Hagler in that department.
Of course it's all opinion as any hypothetical match-up is, but the fighters that had success against Jones, and there were very few, usually muscled Jones and crowed him giving him no room to throw his hooks, but it was always heavier fighters who were a lot stronger that could accomplish that, but even then, most of the time the fighter was not successful, which I don't think Monzon, or Hagler had the strength to do that against Jones. I’m not saying Jones was that much stronger than either, but it took a fighter bigger than Jones to get it done, which in most cases Jones could back anyone off of him with one crisp and hard hook. Also, even though they both punched very well, I don’t think Monzon, or Hagler had the one punch ability to end a fight, or to even turn a fight around…not just with one punch, which at 160 Jones did have that punch. I just think Jones is better in every department except for toughness, which Monzon and Hagler were very good all-around, but usually all the other departments win out over toughness.
I know Hagler and Monzon were both bulls, but Jones was a different breed than any that either fought. He not only had the power to keep them honest, but also the ability to dance away and stay out of reach of any rushing tactics and in his prime I don't see anyone being able to cut the ring off Jones as he could make anyone trying very sorry with probably the fastest hands that I have ever seen and as I said before at 160 Jones was a viscous puncher. I doubt that he could have stopped either man because they both were the kind of fighter that just simply would not go down and they both were just as excellent boxers as they were bulls, Monzon probably a little better than Hagler in that department.
Of course it's all opinion as any hypothetical match-up is, but the fighters that had success against Jones, and there were very few, usually muscled Jones and crowed him giving him no room to throw his hooks, but it was always heavier fighters who were a lot stronger that could accomplish that, but even then, most of the time the fighter was not successful, which I don't think Monzon, or Hagler had the strength to do that against Jones. I’m not saying Jones was that much stronger than either, but it took a fighter bigger than Jones to get it done, which in most cases Jones could back anyone off of him with one crisp and hard hook. Also, even though they both punched very well, I don’t think Monzon, or Hagler had the one punch ability to end a fight, or to even turn a fight around…not just with one punch, which at 160 Jones did have that punch. I just think Jones is better in every department except for toughness, which Monzon and Hagler were very good all-around, but usually all the other departments win out over toughness.
The thing is Barry these two would have been a big step up in class for Roy. They would have had some success against him. I just have my doubts about how he would have handled that. Roy was so used to not getting hit that often that when it happened he didn't always respond as we might expect. He was over the hill for the Johnson fight its true but he still seemed to just fold mentally. I can't see him shutting out either man over 15 and I'd love to see how he responded to either of them having the better of 2 back to back rounds.
Hagler and Monzon preferred opponents to lead and they might not have much joy here as they would have to press the fight. Do you think Marvin's southpaw stance would be a problem for Roy???
Hagler and Monzon preferred opponents to lead and they might not have much joy here as they would have to press the fight. Do you think Marvin's southpaw stance would be a problem for Roy???
re
>>>Do you think Marvin's southpaw stance would be a problem for Roy???<<<
Not really...Jones fought several southpaws...though they were not of Hagler's caliber, but the southpaw stance had little effect on Jones, probably because he was such an unorthodox fighter himself. As for Jones dominating Monzon and Hagler...I don't think it would be a white-wash, but then again...maybe it would be, Jones dominated Toney in that way and I know a lot of people like to say that Toney had to come down so many pounds for the bout, but Toney is and always was a very professional fighter and his problem was not stamina, or conditioning in that fight...it was Jones. Mabe Hagler and Monzon both completely overwhelm Jones and knock him out in three, or four rounds, but I just don't see that happening unless Jones was just caught with a bomb that he did not see, like the shot Tarver landed, but that I just don't see happening either.
Not really...Jones fought several southpaws...though they were not of Hagler's caliber, but the southpaw stance had little effect on Jones, probably because he was such an unorthodox fighter himself. As for Jones dominating Monzon and Hagler...I don't think it would be a white-wash, but then again...maybe it would be, Jones dominated Toney in that way and I know a lot of people like to say that Toney had to come down so many pounds for the bout, but Toney is and always was a very professional fighter and his problem was not stamina, or conditioning in that fight...it was Jones. Mabe Hagler and Monzon both completely overwhelm Jones and knock him out in three, or four rounds, but I just don't see that happening unless Jones was just caught with a bomb that he did not see, like the shot Tarver landed, but that I just don't see happening either.