Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

BOXINGBARMY1
Super Middleweight
Posts: 56
Joined: 02 Nov 2012, 14:44

Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by BOXINGBARMY1 »

I think Roy Jones would win this one.

Foster would crouch like he did against Dick Tiger but Jones would use superior reflexes, footwork and handspeed to befuddle Foster.

I see Jones working along the ropes making Bob lead, Jones trying to draw feints. Not a classic slugfest but an intriguing contest.

Foster was'nt too keen on body shots and I think Roy would mix it body to head.

For me, Jones wins 9 - 3 on rounds. STYLES MAKE FIGHTS!
MEISINGER
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by MEISINGER »

i have to agree with jones winning this one
but the scores would be closer
spudder56
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1568
Joined: 16 Jun 2011, 11:27

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by spudder56 »

MEISINGER wrote:i have to agree with jones winning this one
but the scores would be closer


X 2
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by BoxBuzz »

Foster only needs to get lucky once.

Roy needs to stay lucky for 12 rounds.

Not sure it's all that predictable.

Tarver beats Roy...But Foster does not?

Just stirrin' the pot here.
MEISINGER
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by MEISINGER »

BoxBuzz wrote:Foster only needs to get lucky once.

Roy needs to stay lucky for 12 rounds.

Not sure it's all that predictable.

Tarver beats Roy...But Foster does not?

Just stirrin' the pot here.
boxbuzz come on we are talking prime rjj not the tarver version
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

Jones by decision, Foster is more overrated than Roy is by a wide margin in terms of accomplishment. They both have the artillery to compete at a higher level than their ledgers should put them at. Two top 15-30 Light Heavies in an excellent style contrast. I just can't say Roy being controlled by a jab.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

foxy01 wrote:Prime for prime?

A

Lets not forget Jones was dropped in his prime by Del Valle. Foster lands the same shot, Jones doesn't last another 30 seconds.
:lol:

It was a borderline slip. He wasn't remotely hurt. as questionable as Roy's chin can be, he could survive a flash knockdown from a glancing blow against anyone.
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11173
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Ezzard »

Foster by decapitation.

Foster was better than Tarver by a greater margin than Jones was from his prime.
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Rover »

Ezzard wrote:Foster by decapitation.

Foster was better than Tarver by a greater margin than Jones was from his prime.
We keep agreeing on these match-ups.
:D
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

Ezzard wrote:Foster was better than Tarver by a greater margin than Jones was from his prime.
I'd have to see Bob beat a Light heavy the caliber of tarver to agree with that. Foster's resume is among the most overrated in the history of Boxing.
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11173
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Ezzard »

One thing for sure is that Bob had serious power at 175…an argument can be made that he was the hardest punching champion at the weight.

I know his challengers when champion weren’t the greatest but he didn’t miss anyone out like Roy did…and I’d take his wins over Tiger, Rondon and Finnegan over anything Jones did at 175.
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Rover »

Ezzard wrote:One thing for sure is that Bob had serious power at 175…an argument can be made that he was the hardest punching champion at the weight.

I know his challengers when champion weren’t the greatest but he didn’t miss anyone out like Roy did…and I’d take his wins over Tiger, Rondon and Finnegan over anything Jones did at 175.
:TU:
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

Ezzard wrote:One thing for sure is that Bob had serious power at 175…an argument can be made that he was the hardest punching champion at the weight.

I know his challengers when champion weren’t the greatest but he didn’t miss anyone out like Roy did…and I’d take his wins over Tiger, Rondon and Finnegan over anything Jones did at 175.
He was definitely a handful, long jab and one of the bigger punchers. Archie Moore has a place in that discussion, so does Marvin Johnson.

I would rate Ahumada & Fourie well above Rondon. Those two are quite underrated. I wasn't implying that Jones resume was better, it just never ceases to amaze me how overrated Foster is when it comes to all time lists in such a loaded division. He's routinely top 5 and I think a better case can be made that he isn't top 20. Though he could beat many guys with better resumes.

I'd pick Tarver to beat any of them.
dr_devious
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5349
Joined: 29 Dec 2005, 09:19

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by dr_devious »

BoxBuzz wrote:Foster only needs to get lucky once.

Roy needs to stay lucky for 12 rounds.

Not sure it's all that predictable.

Tarver beats Roy...But Foster does not?

Just stirrin' the pot here.
x2, I also see Foster catching up with Jones at some point and ending it
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by BoxBuzz »

Well Saad, interesting statement. Haven't you gone on record as saying that Foster would easily beat Monzon?

If not excuse my senior moment. I also believe that Foster gets over rated (in order to bring greater glory to Ali and Frazier.) You know the "storybook" stuff of life.

It's the way of the world. lol.

I think Monzon could have stepped up...if the timing was right. Probably not at the end of his career though.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

My imbibing can, at times, overwhelm my exquisite memory, but I wouldn't call anyone a lock against Monzon. I'd pick Foster over several fighters that he can't logically be rated over. Rosenbloom would be a perfect example. I don't see Foster losing that fight, but if Jones retired after Ruiz it would be blasphemy to think Tarver could even compete with him. That's why rating fighters, in my not nearly humble opinion, needs to be on what was instead of what you think could be. John Henry Lewis wipes his ass with Foster as far as resumes go. Could Bob beat him? Sure, save that for hypothesizing, the reality is that Lewis was a far more accomplished fighter.
Jpreisser
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 483
Joined: 24 Jun 2010, 14:53

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Jpreisser »

Jones Jr. by decision. People keep mentioning Tarver`s knockout win over Jones but Roy has a decision victory over him in the first fight and had they fought in their respective primes, Junior surely would have made fairly easy work of Tarver.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15170
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by Ambling Alp II »

I guess we are pretending that Jones would have actaully taken this fight; because he would not have. Foster's competition at light heavyweight was not that great; Jones' was far worse.
Foster would have knocked him out.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by BoxBuzz »

Interesting thought Alp. Jones refuses to engage for one reason or another. Highly possible.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

BoxBuzz wrote:Interesting thought Alp. Jones refuses to engage for one reason or another. Highly possible.
Then again, maybe Foster goes up to Heavy and gets mutilated by Tommy Morrison in 14 seconds.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by BoxBuzz »

He did seem to have a feeble aspect when face with HW's.

But...Jones, not a full fledged Heavy, might be more competitive.

I'd hesitate to pick a winner.


Saad, just looking for an opinion here. Was Jones a monster until he was no longer a monster? Or was he just ok, until he was exposed by Tarver?

I for one was genuinely impressed, much for what he did with Toney, Hopkins, and a few other good non heavies.

and I was very grateful to him for evading the Hugs of Ruiz, and slapping him about a bit, most of us wanted to see that I think.

(Though I did prefer the Tua man's approach to facing an overly tactile opponent.)

Once Roy started to believe his own hype, he seemed to self destruct.

Also....I do believe that Tarver skim, scanned and studied Roy and became his "boutique opponent". He learned from this first encounter. I think Tarver's neuralizing tap, and Roy's weight gain/loss robbed Roy of his best weapon. Namely his neuro reflexes, which by any honest assessment were at one time breathtaking. Though he never did (in my opinion) truly capture the fundamentals of the game.

Had he a chin, and a real lock on the fundamentals, he may have better lasted the test of time.
misterpunch
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 1252
Joined: 13 Jan 2012, 17:48

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by misterpunch »

foster might have been overated but he willingly went in with ali and frazier and was not embarrassed by either. i take bob to land a corker on jones elusive but vulnerable beard. end of fight.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

BoxBuzz wrote:He did seem to have a feeble aspect when face with HW's.

But...Jones, not a full fledged Heavy, might be more competitive.

I'd hesitate to pick a winner.


Saad, just looking for an opinion here. Was Jones a monster until he was no longer a monster? Or was he just ok, until he was exposed by Tarver?

I for one was genuinely impressed, much for what he did with Toney, Hopkins, and a few other good non heavies.

and I was very grateful to him for evading the Hugs of Ruiz, and slapping him about a bit, most of us wanted to see that I think.

(Though I did prefer the Tua man's approach to facing an overly tactile opponent.)

Once Roy started to believe his own hype, he seemed to self destruct.

Also....I do believe that Tarver skim, scanned and studied Roy and became his "boutique opponent". He learned from this first encounter. I think Tarver's neuralizing tap, and Roy's weight gain/loss robbed Roy of his best weapon. Namely his neuro reflexes, which by any honest assessment were at one time breathtaking. Though he never did (in my opinion) truly capture the fundamentals of the game.

Had he a chin, and a real lock on the fundamentals, he may have better lasted the test of time.
Jones is a guy along the lines of Tyson that people, for reasons unknown, need to end their prime the second they lost. Totally agree on Tarver, he would have been a nightmare for Roy on the best night of his life. Always annoying when fans have to "go there", I would rate the first Tarver fight in the top 3 wins of Roy's career. He wasn't shot, he got drilled. Coming back from being stopped is different for every fighter, Jones didn't have the mental strength to do it. Very telling was the 3rd fight, Roy lit him up in the 4th and 5th rounds, he could have won that fight, but he didn't have it anymore upstairs.
The End
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 931
Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 17:53

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by The End »

foxy01 wrote:Prime for prime?

As boxbuzz says. Foster only needs to get lucky once with either hand, and Jones goes to sleep.

Lets not forget Jones was dropped in his prime by Del Valle. Foster lands the same shot, Jones doesn't last another 30 seconds. I think Bob was the only guy to cut Ali ( which I think required six stitches above the eye ) who knows what might have happened if that shot landed clean on the chin?

I'm not saying Ali would have been KO'd, but he might have been KD'd. Foster definitely hit harder than Jones.
You didn't see the Del Valle fight .

For my money Jones Glen Kelleys Foster.
SaadOffTheDeck
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 19602
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38

Re: Roy Jones (1999 - 2002) v Bob Foster (1968 - 1974)

Post by SaadOffTheDeck »

The End wrote:
foxy01 wrote:Prime for prime?

As boxbuzz says. Foster only needs to get lucky once with either hand, and Jones goes to sleep.

Lets not forget Jones was dropped in his prime by Del Valle. Foster lands the same shot, Jones doesn't last another 30 seconds. I think Bob was the only guy to cut Ali ( which I think required six stitches above the eye ) who knows what might have happened if that shot landed clean on the chin?

I'm not saying Ali would have been KO'd, but he might have been KD'd. Foster definitely hit harder than Jones.
You didn't see the Del Valle fight .
:TU:
Post Reply