BoxRec

From what I know about Greb from reports (and I've never seen him fight on film) he was a highly skilled swarmer. Even if I follow a pro-Jones argument and concede that Jones is only one notch below Robinson where do we rate Greb in comparison with LaMotta, one notch higher, maybe even 2??? You see what I'm getting at? Just liie Robinson and LaMotta who'd have thought Leonard could be outpointed by Duran; Tunney by Greb????

I say Greb climbs all over him. Jones would never have been put under as much pressure. And becasue Jones was so much better than the opposition he has faced throughout his career he never had to deal with what Greb would put on him. He never learnt how to deal with it and simply has no answers.

I have to say that I agree wuith ezzard . What it comes down to is that we know what Robinson could do, or Hagler, any of the rest. They proved their mettle in fights in which they were cut, knocked down, suffered a hand orhad to rally from far behind late in a fight. And we knew what the accomlishment was worth because it was achieved against an opponent that had established his own credentials. With RJJ I'm asked to believe that he punches very hard. And what is offered as proof? One article that I read explained that RJJ would ko Conn, the same Conn that fought Louis to a standstill for 13 rounds as a 167lb HW would lose several rounds short of 13 against a guy his own size. Proof of this? RJJ knocked down Merqui Sosa!!! That is what sometimes makes me resentful of modern potentially great fighters, and especially to today's boxing journalists. I am constantly asked to suspend all logic and reason and to accept the inane. Because RJJ crushed a way passed washed up Vaca I'm asked to believe that h'd do Tony Zale the same way. Because James Butler pushed RJJ in to a corner and flailed like a scared school boy for a minute before tiring and getting KO'd I'm to expecta similar fate for Fullmer. His fight with Hopkins at 160, two futuire all time greats. And all RJJ and BH proved was that in 1937 neither of them would have made it to 10 rounders yet.

I'm one of the biggest advocates that you will ever see for the old-timers, but even though they are my favorites, they were not super-human, all were human.

I don't think Jones could have knocked out Conn, or very many top light heavyweights because Jones did not take punching power up to 175. However at 160 Jones could have laid anyone out...and that includes Greb, Robinson, Hagler, Monzon, or any one else...whether it would have happened...no one knows and no one ever will know, but Jones punched hard enough at 160 to keep a swarmer like Greb honest...Greb would not walk through Jones' punches the way did some other fighters.

I can understand that people don't like Jones, just the same way that I don't like Lennox Lewis, but I don't let my dislike cloud the fact of what he accomplished and if I bash him I usually have a pretty good argument and try not to let bias enter too much into what I think about his skills!

Barry

I'm not a Jones hater. I think he's been a bit over hyped but that's generally the way with active fighters, after all the media does have a duty to sell the fight game...

Jones was like quicksilver, could hit hard and had cat-like reflexes but it appears that these refelxes hid the fact that he can be hurt/KO'd. I don't think your ability to take a punch deteriorates, but as fighters get older they do take more punches. Jones did look unbeatable for a while but now his achilles heel is all too obvious. As I've said before there is no way Johnson or Tarver stop even an over the hill Greb, Monzon or Hagler. And these guys would have fought anybody at anytime. Jones has picked his fights to maximise his achievements and you can't blame him in some ways but it smacks of a lack of confidence.

I think the old timers had an advantage in that losing a fight was awful but not the end of their careers (I'm also a big advocate of the idea that an early loss in a career really helps to make a fighter - in a psychological sense) whereas today it seems to really hurt them.

On the subject of Greb my understading is that he took far less leather than people think. He was a come forward type of guy but he wasn't easy to hit either. I don't think he needs to walk through Jones's shots but instead would prove more elusive than one might expect. All this is not to say that Jones can't win a figth against Greb (for example) but I think he loses more than he wins.

With regards to your last post though... No way does Roy lay out Hagler

Ezzard wrote:Barry

I'm not a Jones hater. I think he's been a bit over hyped but that's generally the way with active fighters, after all the media does have a duty to sell the fight game...

Jones was like quicksilver, could hit hard and had cat-like reflexes but it appears that these refelxes hid the fact that he can be hurt/KO'd. I don't think your ability to take a punch deteriorates, but as fighters get older they do take more punches. Jones did look unbeatable for a while but now his achilles heel is all too obvious. As I've said before there is no way Johnson or Tarver stop even an over the hill Greb, Monzon or Hagler. And these guys would have fought anybody at anytime. Jones has picked his fights to maximise his achievements and you can't blame him in some ways but it smacks of a lack of confidence.

I think the old timers had an advantage in that losing a fight was awful but not the end of their careers (I'm also a big advocate of the idea that an early loss in a career really helps to make a fighter - in a psychological sense) whereas today it seems to really hurt them.

On the subject of Greb my understading is that he took far less leather than people think. He was a come forward type of guy but he wasn't easy to hit either. I don't think he needs to walk through Jones's shots but instead would prove more elusive than one might expect. All this is not to say that Jones can't win a figth against Greb (for example) but I think he loses more than he wins.

With regards to your last post though... No way does Roy lay out Hagler

Yeah you couldn't lay Hagler out with a sledgehammer.

Personaly, I've always liked Jones, and still do. But like with a lot of my other favorite fighters, I don't confuse someone being a favorite with them being the best. I'd make Jones a top ten middle for sure--but not the best. I might make him top ten at light heavy--but only barely.

In the long and illustrious history of those two divisions, that is giving the man props--big props.

Oh, and before someone brings up his heavyweight title win a proof of Jones's all-time greatness as a light heavyweight, two words: John Ruiz.
How long of a thread do you think we could produce if we decided to make a serious effort to list every sub-heavyweight of all time who'd be able to beat that guy?

Hey, very interesting topic

Roy Jones, Jr like Marvin Hagler, is one of the best fighters that I have ever seen in terms of gifted talent. He had a rare combination of speed and power and carried that speed all the way to lightheavy. Remember, He started at 154. That is almost 20 pounds of carrying your speed and power, which VERY DIFFICULT to do and mantain. Ray Leonard was one of the fastest in hand speed, but when he went up on weight, he lost a lot of it. Roy Jones ALWAYS HAD THAT SPEED...The same speed he had at 154, was the same at 175.

One thing for years was that people wondered if Jones could REALLY take a GOOD SHOT. The EVIDENCE and the answer was clear in the Tarver and Glenn Johnson fights...He certainly CANNOT.

In my views of Jones vs the all time greats??? let's see!!!

Robinson vs Jones at 160: You may say that I am crazy, BUT SUGAR RAY ALWAYS HAD PROBLEMS WITH SLICK BOXERS...HE ALWAYS HAD!!! Jones was slick and fast and would give Sugar Ray PROBLEMS just like Randy Turpin and Ralph "Tiger" Jones. Some say that the great Kid Gavilan beat him, but was SNUBBED from the decision. Turpin was beating him in the rematch, and Robinson, seeing that he was going to lose (he asked the referee for one more round, because of a cut), put it all on the line and stopped the English man. The other question is if Jones can take a punch from Robinson at 160??? Answer is NO. But Robinson has to catch him first. Would he catch him??? Probably NOT...Jones by decision just like Turpin, Gavilan and Tiger Jones did. I think Robinson was NOT AS DOMINANT AT MIDDLEWEIGHT as when he was at welterweight.

Hagler vs Jones at 160: Hagler, as I said before of Jones, is one of the greatest fighters that I ever seen. He could slug it out, he could box, and he can punch anmd had better STAMINA than Jones. May not have Jones SPEED and REFLEXES, but he was a BETTER COUNTER PUNCHER THAN JONES. Was also STRONGER THAN JONES at 160 and hit harder and had better chin...Hagler was also a COMPLETE FIGHTER at his best, (just look at the Mugabi and Hamsho tapes). Had more determination than Jones and courage. I do not think that Jones would outbox him. Forget the Sugar Ray Fight, Hagler was not at his best that night. Hagler by TKO in round 10.

Foster vs Jones at 175: Foster at 175 was a MONSTER!!! AT heavy??? well, he was the heavyweights' punching bag. He lost, I think, 7 of his 8 defeats against heavyweights. He really could not cope with the BIG DOGS. Foster had Great boxing skills and underrated speed at 175. He had that jab. He reminds me of the great Tommy Hearns. Would Jones get inside??? I do not htink Jones had the HEART to go inside Foster's guard. he would be INTIMIDATED just like he was INTIMIDATED to go inside Antonio Tarver's guard. Foster was also a good inside fighter, something that Jones NEVER WAS. He would use that jab effectively against Jones. Jones would not carry the fight. he probably fight a defensive fight all the way, trying not to get hurt. IN A BORING CONTEST, FOSTER BY DECISION, due to Jones' reluctancy of forcing the attack.

Fullmer vs Jones: I can see Jones winning the fight here by decision. He would not KO an IRONED CHIN FULLMER. Forget the second Robinson fight, that only happens once in a lifetime... Fullmer relentless attack would be great for Jones, but I do not think Jones would be overwhelmed by that. Fullmer had excellent stamina, but was crude in skill. Can he whistand Jones' flurries. He probably get hit too many times by Jones, who had the advantage in speed. Jones is the winner.

Greb vs Jones at 160: I CANNOT SAY. I have never seen Greb fight, but he had an AWESOME RECORD. Just picture this: Only 8 defeats in more than 300 fights!!! That to me says a lot!!! Greb is DEFINATELY ONE OF THE GREATEST FIGHTERS THAT EVER LIVED. AN EASY TOP 10 ALL TIME. But I cannot compare the technical skills of the 1920s vs the 1990s...I CANNOT.
I do not have an ANSWER.

Charles vs Jones at 160: What Jones can do what Charles can't ??? Charles was a PERFECT FIGHTING MACHINE!!! He had that SMOOTH, QUICK, SHARP AND FAST LEFT HOOK. PERFECT!!! BEAUTIFUL!!! AWESOME!!! I do not think that Jones would want a fight with a guy like Charles. I personally believe he would have ducked him, AND WHY NOT??? I would have DUCKED CHARLES TOO!!! He was as fast as Jones, BUT MORE DETERMINED, probably hit harder than Jones and I do not htink that Jones could outsmart him, NO MATTER WHAT JONES BRING AT HIM. Charles by decision or late KO. HE WAS TOO GOOD FOR HIS OWN GOOD. Ask the fighters that did not want to give him a crack for the title.

Moore vs Jones at 175: Difficult to judge. I have to see Moore's fights with the great Harold Johnson before 1954. After 1955, Anybody that was very good could whip Moore. If it is the version of Moore that fought Yvonne Durelle I and Floyd Patterson, I do not give Moore a chance against Roy. But if it is the 1940s version of Moore, then I think MAYBE Moore will win. The problem is, I have never seen Moore's fights of the 1940s. Never seen his fights with Johnson, who was as slick as Jones. I DO NOT KNOW...THIS ONE, LIKE GREB, IS A HARD ONE TO JUDGE due because I have REALLY NOT SEEN Moore at his very best.

Harold Johnson vs Jones: BORING FIGHT FOR THOSE THAT WANT TO SEE ACTION. It will be just like Leonard-Benitez (the first 10 rounds) going into a CHESS MATCH. The problem is, I have NEVER SEEN JOHNSON FIGHT EITHER. How good was he ON VIDEO??? I have seen this guy Johhnson record and is very impressive. He beat TOP NOTCH OPPOSITION, SOMETHING THAT JONES NEVER DID!!! Jones beat and fought SOME OF THE BEST, NOT THE VERY BEST. That is why he is NOT IN MY ALL-TIME TOP 40 LIST which I would give it with more emphasis in weeks to come. Let's give it a DRAW...SHALL WE???

Conn vs Jones at 175: Is another fight of speed vs speed. Conn has more DETERMINATION, he showed it vs the great Joe Louis in the first fight. Can Jones catch him??? I do not think that Jones could outbox this clever fighter. Conn was not JUST clever, he was VERY CLEVER!!! Conn by decision. More speed than Jones at this weight.

Burley vs Jones: I cannot say. I have NEVER SEEN BURLEY FIGHT. I may have to ask hall of fame trainer Eddie Futch about Burley, but he's now dead. (Rest in Peace, Eddie!!!)...Probably, Jones would have ducked him just like Fritzie Zivic and other fighters that did not wanted to give him a crack at the title. Hey, probably Jones would have been DUCKED TOO by Zivic and others...We will never know.[/b]

that is just it.......jones ability puts him ahead of the crowd. it is why he hasn't been tested. that is is greatness. why do you have to get tested and in competitive fights for people to finally say "he is great," or "he faced adversity and overcame if?" he was simply physically better and that was enough for him to blow away the field.

as far as the steroid comments go, ripped fuel (with ephedra) is not a freakin' steroid. it has no anabolic effects at all. it is a vasodialator and would simply give a boost of energry, which he didn't need against any of the guys he fought.

until the first tarver fight, the only fighters i ever say give roy any trouble (and i wouldn't even call it trouble, but more or less, make him look less dominant) were montell griffin in their first fight, and that guy from argentina, castro i think was his name, but roy still won nearly every round agains castro, and had montel not taken a dive to get out of the first fight, was about to be knocked out.

elmersalsa wrote:Hey, very interesting topic



Robinson vs Jones at 160: You may say that I am crazy, BUT SUGAR RAY ALWAYS HAD PROBLEMS WITH SLICK BOXERS...HE ALWAYS HAD!!! Jones was slick and fast and would give Sugar Ray PROBLEMS just like Randy Turpin and Ralph "Tiger" Jones. Some say that the great Kid Gavilan beat him, but was SNUBBED from the decision. Turpin was beating him in the rematch, and Robinson, seeing that he was going to lose (he asked the referee for one more round, because of a cut), put it all on the line and stopped the English man. The other question is if Jones can take a punch from Robinson at 160??? Answer is NO. But Robinson has to catch him first. Would he catch him??? Probably NOT...Jones by decision just like Turpin, Gavilan and Tiger Jones did. I think Robinson was NOT AS DOMINANT AT MIDDLEWEIGHT as when he was at welterweight.

[/b]

You say Robinson probably could not catch Jones, I think if anyone could catch Jones it would be Robinson.

tiredoldngrey wrote:I have to say that I agree wuith ezzard . What it comes down to is that we know what Robinson could do, or Hagler, any of the rest. They proved their mettle in fights in which they were cut, knocked down, suffered a hand orhad to rally from far behind late in a fight. And we knew what the accomlishment was worth because it was achieved against an opponent that had established his own credentials. With RJJ I'm asked to believe that he punches very hard. And what is offered as proof? One article that I read explained that RJJ would ko Conn, the same Conn that fought Louis to a standstill for 13 rounds as a 167lb HW would lose several rounds short of 13 against a guy his own size. Proof of this? RJJ knocked down Merqui Sosa!!! That is what sometimes makes me resentful of modern potentially great fighters, and especially to today's boxing journalists. I am constantly asked to suspend all logic and reason and to accept the inane. Because RJJ crushed a way passed washed up Vaca I'm asked to believe that h'd do Tony Zale the same way. Because James Butler pushed RJJ in to a corner and flailed like a scared school boy for a minute before tiring and getting KO'd I'm to expecta similar fate for Fullmer. His fight with Hopkins at 160, two futuire all time greats. And all RJJ and BH proved was that in 1937 neither of them would have made it to 10 rounders yet.

Amen!

-Dapa

Grimm wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Hey, very interesting topic



Robinson vs Jones at 160: You may say that I am crazy, BUT SUGAR RAY ALWAYS HAD PROBLEMS WITH SLICK BOXERS...HE ALWAYS HAD!!! Jones was slick and fast and would give Sugar Ray PROBLEMS just like Randy Turpin and Ralph "Tiger" Jones. Some say that the great Kid Gavilan beat him, but was SNUBBED from the decision. Turpin was beating him in the rematch, and Robinson, seeing that he was going to lose (he asked the referee for one more round, because of a cut), put it all on the line and stopped the English man. The other question is if Jones can take a punch from Robinson at 160??? Answer is NO. But Robinson has to catch him first. Would he catch him??? Probably NOT...Jones by decision just like Turpin, Gavilan and Tiger Jones did. I think Robinson was NOT AS DOMINANT AT MIDDLEWEIGHT as when he was at welterweight.

[/b]

You say Robinson probably could not catch Jones, I think if anyone could catch Jones it would be Robinson.

I don't think so!!! Look at the first and second fight with Turpin. Turpin was not even in RJJ's class.