BoxRec

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote:

bennie wrote: Yeah, and he looked lousy every time.

It looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one - the only time he looked lousy was against Tarver, who in reality isn't good enough to win a round against peak Jones.

Any win vs a fellow great like Hopkins is good performance in my book. Hopkins ran him pretty close, but Jones was always in "control". He was electric against James Toney and very impressive against Ruiz. Didn't see his performance against Johnston.

Yeah, but did he stop any of them? Did he really stamp his authority or settle for the points? I'll tell you. He did what Sven Ottke did and settled for the points. If Jones is great, I guess Ottke is as well.

Yes, but did Sugar Ray Leonard stop Hagler, Benetez, Duran. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples aswell.

The thing is that any victory is a good victory when your talking about this level of opponent. Sven Ottke's best victory is probably against Charles Brewer - who is hardly in the league of Hopkins and Toney.

ottke a great you no nothing bennie so dont go judging me,even ottke nows he is a joke,now go and read boxing news and try and convice us all you no something about boxing 8)

stujones wrote:

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote: It looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one - the only time he looked lousy was against Tarver, who in reality isn't good enough to win a round against peak Jones.

Any win vs a fellow great like Hopkins is good performance in my book. Hopkins ran him pretty close, but Jones was always in "control". He was electric against James Toney and very impressive against Ruiz. Didn't see his performance against Johnston.

Yeah, but did he stop any of them? Did he really stamp his authority or settle for the points? I'll tell you. He did what Sven Ottke did and settled for the points. If Jones is great, I guess Ottke is as well.

Yes, but did Sugar Ray Leonard stop Hagler, Benetez, Duran, Did Ray Robinson rubber stamp his authority over La Motta.

The thing is that any victory is a good victory when your talking about this level of opponent. Sven Ottke's best victory is probably against Charles Brewer - who is hardly in the league of Hopkins and Toney.

Sugar Ray stopped Benitez and Duran, yes.
Ray Robinson's middleweight title win over Jake LaMotta was so one-sided it was labelled "The St Valentine's Day Massacre".
I would say Ottke's best wins were over Glencoffe Johnson, Silvio Branco and Anthony Mundine.

??????

Southpaw Stylist wrote:

Southpaw Stylist wrote:Who did Ottke offer rematches against?

Bennie answer this please.

beduff wrote:??????

Don't you know who those two guys are?

Southpaw Stylist wrote:

Southpaw Stylist wrote:

Southpaw Stylist wrote:Who did Ottke offer rematches against?

Bennie answer this please.

Check the record out for yourself.

yes but wot is the point in this picture?bennie go and read the boxing news and baffle us all with your breaking news

Did he offer Reid, Brewer (after 2nd time) and Mads Larsen rematches?

Southpaw Stylist wrote:Did he offer Reid, Brewer (after 2nd time) and Mads Larsen rematches?

You're twisting my words to suit your argument. Let's have some invective of your own to explain why Ottke isn't great if you feel so passionately about it (without resorting to personal abuse).
The fact is, the two Ottke fights that caused the most outcry in the boxing world - against Charles Brewer and Thomas Tate, saw the German give them rematches.

fantastically promoted and matched. Over achieved, but fair play to him, he did the best he could and remained 'unbeaten'. He knew if he fought Calzaghe he'd probably lose, therefore didn't take the fight...smart.

Convincing arguement from Bennie...but i`d still rather stuff my Johnson into a blender than watch the guy fight again.....

Oh Yeah...Foster v Jones.....lop-sided points win for Roy IMO, unless Foster was to land one of his bombs...but i think Roy in his prime would be too slick for all but the very cream of boxing.

That's what I thought, but I didn't wanna get into a generations argument.

Out of all his fights i was disappointed not to see Mundine get a rematch, i aint no Mundine fan by any stretch of the imagination but he was seriously taking Ottke to school, styles make fights and there's didn't mix in Ottke's favour at all. If only Mundine could take a punch then we could have seen an away win, i would always have loved to have known how that fight would have ended up with the judges seen as Ottke was dropped and Mundine had two points deducted for a headbutt, Mundine just about won every other round in between.

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote:

bennie wrote: Roy Jones is a great all right. A great matchmaker.

Yeah he is - "I'll fight the best Middleweight of a generation, the best Super Middleweight of a generation, the dual light heavyweight world champion, a universally recognised top 5 heavyweight and then move back down and fight an opponent people have wanted to see me fight for years, when I'm not in tip top shape".

Thats a great to me.

Yeah, and he looked lousy every time.

But he won, didn't he? Honestly, how is that an argument for RJ not being great, when you're arguing that Ottke is great because he was a tricky boxer who always found a way to win?

I quite liked Ottke in the late 90s, up to the Mundine fight really. A lot of people gave him stick, but I admired the fact that he was an overachiever who got the job done. After seeing him get a terrible runaround from a 10 fight novice, it was apparent he was on the slide, though. Haven't seen this last fight, but by all accounts it's a good performance to bow out on.

Is Ottke 'great'? Well, you can make a case for him being great 'by today's standards', or whatever other caveats you want to put in there, but I can't see a case for him being truely great. You have to respect what he did, even if you don't like how he did it. He won't be missed, though.

bennie wrote:

stujones wrote:

bennie wrote: Yeah, but did he stop any of them? Did he really stamp his authority or settle for the points? I'll tell you. He did what Sven Ottke did and settled for the points. If Jones is great, I guess Ottke is as well.

Yes, but did Sugar Ray Leonard stop Hagler, Benetez, Duran, Did Ray Robinson rubber stamp his authority over La Motta.

The thing is that any victory is a good victory when your talking about this level of opponent. Sven Ottke's best victory is probably against Charles Brewer - who is hardly in the league of Hopkins and Toney.

Sugar Ray stopped Benitez and Duran, yes.
Ray Robinson's middleweight title win over Jake LaMotta was so one-sided it was labelled "The St Valentine's Day Massacre".
I would say Ottke's best wins were over Glencoffe Johnson, Silvio Branco and Anthony Mundine.

Good points my examples were not the best, However your argument about Ray Robinson and Jake La Motta can surely be applied to Toney vs Jones. It might have been a different type of one-sided, but its as equally one-sided as "The St Valantine's day massacre". It was so one sided that the public wanted to see Toney re-prove himself as the #2 before they called for a rematch.

Same with Hopkins, Jones made Hopkins look like an ordinary, decent fighter - not one of the greatest middleweights of all time. It was only after Hopkins destroyed another P4P fighter that the public wanted to see a rematch. Roy won decisively, the only time he hasn't was with Tarver - and he's getting an immediate rematch.

As for Ottke's best wins, I'm am sure that it was you who has said that two of them were highly disputed, yes he beat Mundine and did well - but is Mundine all that? He was something like a 10 fight novice at the time and had come from a different sport. He also got put down in his last fight against a challenger who makes Tocker Pudwill look like Ali.

Even so - Johnson, Mundine, Branco good fighters, but hardly near the same category as the greats Roy has faught. Johnson only beat Woods by 4 points in 24 rounds in boxing, Roy KO'd Woods in 6. Branco lost to Richie Woodhall, and I have spoken about Mundine.

Just look at the record of Roy, look how many world champions he has faced, Gonzales at the time was criticised as being a poor opponent, yet he goes on to take Michaelswecki's crown in Germany.

I don't know what peoples problems are but in his prime Ottke was almost unhitable with a great defence and to think that Calzaghe or any other 168 pounder around today could have KOd him is rediculous. Mundine fought an over the hill Ottke and couldn't beat him and Mundine is twice as quick as Calzaghe.

Ben Keilty wrote:I don't know what peoples problems are but in his prime Ottke was almost unhitable with a great defence and to think that Calzaghe or any other 168 pounder around today could have KOd him is rediculous. Mundine fought an over the hill Ottke and couldn't beat him and Mundine is twice as quick as Calzaghe.

Yeah, I don't know about your last sentence but I agree with everything else. Ottke vs Calzaghe wouldn't not have been clear cut (whatever country they faught).

mickeybeard wrote:Ottke is great because he was a tricky boxer who always found a way to win?

This is a tricky argument because Ottke always did find a way to win but it was usually through contentious judging decisions, but on the flip side it wasn't like his fights were so one sided the other way that it was scandalously biased, i mean in most of his dodgy wins it was never clear cut either way so i suppose he must have being doing something right. But when someone is labelled as "always finding a way to win" it usually means a limited puncher who was mostly outboxed but always found a big punch to win his fights, Ottke used to just keep it close and stifle the opponent and knew if he kept it close to a draw or even leaning towards his foe he could just stay on his feet and the decision would be his. Give him credit for what he did but what he did do was not good for the sport of Boxing and now he has retired there will just be another Ottke waiting in the wings to take his place.

Weeeeeell, that's a fairly 'judicious' use of my post there mate.

I was not arguing that Ottke was great at all (although I said I respect him). I was wondering why Bennie can point out that RJ looked crap in some of his bigger fights (which he won) as though it procludes him from being great, while on the other hand saying that Ottke is great when he made a career from grinding out wins in distinctly unglamorous fashion.

Mundine is twice as quick as Calzaghe.[/quote]

you sure?
So you reckon Mundine would beat Calzaghe thats interesting one thing is for sure Ottke ko'd him and JC hits much harder wouldnt see it going 6 myself.

For my take I dont think Ottke was a great and I do think that he did run from Calzaghe in the latter part of his career.
He did lose to Reid that was just a total disgrace, and his style was not exactly crowd pleasing for the neutral. BUT in his defence I dont think JC has done himself any favours, as he seemed to be content if beating Ottke cast offs for the last 2 years. A rather worrying trend.
So there defintely is some credence in the fact that Ottke mixed it with better opponents as JC seemed to want to have a look at them courtesy of Sven first certianly in 2002/3 - reads Brewer / Pudwill and Mitchell.
With a limted but hard Jiminez thrown in, not particualry awe-inspiring.

bennie wrote:Most world title defences ever made per reign:

Joe Louis: 25
Abe Attell: 22
Ricardo Lopez: 21
Sven Ottke: 21
Larry Holmes: 20

Bennie, those figures may be robust on the surface, but it's fair to say (in my opinion) that a disproportionately high number of those Ottke defences were dubious decisions or outright robberies....

I've been getting slaughtered in this debate, and knew I would. But I'm surprised at the number of people who feel Calzaghe would have easily beaten Ottke. Yes, in Wales he would. But in Germany! Not in a million years.