BoxRec

SwayzeWithNoShirtOn wrote: ↑15 May 2020, 12:09

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑14 May 2020, 18:01 Scurred of Dariusz

Maybe. Seriously, he'd be a HUGE favorite in that fight. And it could have generated a lot of money. So why didn't he take it? The bit about the scarring of the Olympics doesn't real play in Peoria.


I really think Jones was his generation's Cooney (whom I hold in comparatively high esteem). He only liked Boxing when he was winning, and catching his face on the front page. Not that he wasn't blessed with talent. But it was mostly about a love of winning. Cooney, of course, wasn't as LUCKY as Jones.

Why would it have generated a lot of money? It wouldn't have, that's why it didn't happen. Cooney was a draw, Roy wasn't, but Roy would have kicked his ass.

At his best the guy barely lost a single round of boxing and that was in title fights, amazing stuff. He toyed with top class fighters and did things most fighters could only dream of. Sometimes the bragging and shite talk overshadowed just how good this guy was

bollocks wrote: ↑25 Sep 2020, 18:18 At his best the guy barely lost a single round of boxing and that was in title fights, amazing stuff. He toyed with top class fighters and did things most fighters could only dream of. Sometimes the bragging and shite talk overshadowed just how good this guy was

Him and Whitaker were amazing then.

detamour wrote: ↑25 Sep 2020, 12:06

goose 5 wrote: ↑12 May 2020, 18:43 In his prime he was called the G.O.A.T. by some and that was ridiculous.

That was Bert Sugar in boxing digest after the Hill Fight, or was it Herbert G Goldman?

That was Herb Goldman. He'll have revised his opinion now. Budd Schulberg certainly did.

Yep, i still have that Magazine all these yrs later!

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑25 Sep 2020, 18:19

bollocks wrote: ↑25 Sep 2020, 18:18 At his best the guy barely lost a single round of boxing and that was in title fights, amazing stuff. He toyed with top class fighters and did things most fighters could only dream of. Sometimes the bragging and shite talk overshadowed just how good this guy was

Him and Whitaker were amazing then.

- Roy and Pea were amazing then, Roy as the finest prime boxer/puncher ever and Pea the best ever class clown.

Sorta like you were amazingly stupid then, and even more so now.

They do also share a timid streak of unable to grasp legendary status, ie Roy turning down double his $5mil HBO purse to fight the Dariusz in Germany on the eve of tying Rocky's record, and Pea and Duva ducking the record setting JCC after he utterly ruined the career of Taylor at the peak of his career. They waited until Frankie finally exposed his decline.

Hey, Stupid People Matter too, so no sweat

1st class wanker

Roy was fine as long as he had that superior speed and reflexes, it enabled him to beat guys with better skills , like Hopkins and Toney.

Along the way, Roy seems to forget a bit about defense, rolling with punches and keeping his mitts up and chin down. After all, he was so much faster than anyone.


Then he slowed down a micro second and got knocked the fornicate out by Tarver, which opened the floodgates , until eventually he was getting flattened by ordinary fighters. He did manage to pull himself together enough for a few good moments against Calzaghe.

Compare Roy's career to Archie Moore, who got smarter and more skilled as he reached his thirties and even until his forties. Perhaps Roys chances against other all time light heavies, Bob Foster, Billy Conn, Harry Greb (who often fought light heavies even though he was a middleweight) and Gene Tunney , who started as a light heavy, might seem to be diminished when you compare the fighters entire career.

Roy at his best could possibly outspeed anyone in history, but once he slowed down he did not seem to be able to take any kind of headshot whatsoever. Would Archie Moore or Bob Foster ever have been kayoed in one round against the likes of a Danny Green, even when they were diminished by age?

provallone wrote: ↑27 Sep 2020, 06:58 Roy was fine as long as he had that superior speed and reflexes, it enabled him to beat guys with better skills , like Hopkins and Toney.

Along the way, Roy seems to forget a bit about defense, rolling with punches and keeping his mitts up and chin down. After all, he was so much faster than anyone.


Then he slowed down a micro second and got knocked the fornicate out by Tarver, which opened the floodgates , until eventually he was getting flattened by ordinary fighters. He did manage to pull himself together enough for a few good moments against Calzaghe.

Compare Roy's career to Archie Moore, who got smarter and more skilled as he reached his thirties and even until his forties. Perhaps Roys chances against other all time light heavies, Bob Foster, Billy Conn, Harry Greb (who often fought light heavies even though he was a middleweight) and Gene Tunney , who started as a light heavy, might seem to be diminished when you compare the fighters entire career.

Roy at his best could possibly outspeed anyone in history, but once he slowed down he did not seem to be able to take any kind of headshot whatsoever. Would Archie Moore or Bob Foster ever have been kayoed in one round against the likes of a Danny Green, even when they were diminished by age?

- Pay attention to your false analogy.

Comparing Roy to Archie like comparing air to water. They both have elements of each, but two more essential dissimilar mixtures cannot be imagined.

Roy turned pro to wild acclaim as Olympic silver medalist and Val Barker winner. Arch picked out of a crowd in Podunk Missouri as an emergency filler in the post slavery Jim Crow era of the Mississippi River people where he was birthed at home with no birth certificate.

Graphing the two, Arch starts at 0 and Roy at a 20-30. By the end of Roy's prime, age where he and his trainer talk retirement, he was considered the best ever by many, he's at the top top of the graph.

By age 34, Arch had something like 18 losses, 4 by KO and only due more beatings. You might have arranged a charity bout for a nice stipen to send him home to Miss to buy a small farm, but every story has an ending and their's a doozy.

They cross on the graph with Arch on an all time upswing and Roy skeetering around on spaghetti legs that used to play minor league day basketball before leaping left hook KOs at night.

Roy a once in 100 years physical phenom intelligent enough to put it to use it. Arch could never match Prime Roy physically, but was coming into his prime as a self taught genius that cannot be topped in boxing history that propelled him into Legendary Statas.

Re Danny Green: He flew to the US to make a gentlemans agreement with Popkins and Roy. He and Roy fight in Oz, and winner gets Popkins with Oz being where the $ was.

Danny KOs Roy, but Roy filed a protest that was ignored that he used illegal wraps. Popkins being a cowardly bawling worm reneged their agreement to fight the loser. Roy still had enough to send Pops to the canvas aka Calzage and too many other times yelping like a kick cur and still bawling like a baby when announced he'd just won one of the stupidest fights ever.

Just sayin

provallone wrote: ↑27 Sep 2020, 06:58 Roy was fine as long as he had that superior speed and reflexes, it enabled him to beat guys with better skills , like Hopkins and Toney.

Along the way, Roy seems to forget a bit about defense, rolling with punches and keeping his mitts up and chin down. After all, he was so much faster than anyone.


Then he slowed down a micro second and got knocked the fornicate out by Tarver, which opened the floodgates , until eventually he was getting flattened by ordinary fighters. He did manage to pull himself together enough for a few good moments against Calzaghe.

Compare Roy's career to Archie Moore, who got smarter and more skilled as he reached his thirties and even until his forties. Perhaps Roys chances against other all time light heavies, Bob Foster, Billy Conn, Harry Greb (who often fought light heavies even though he was a middleweight) and Gene Tunney , who started as a light heavy, might seem to be diminished when you compare the fighters entire career.

Roy at his best could possibly outspeed anyone in history, but once he slowed down he did not seem to be able to take any kind of headshot whatsoever. Would Archie Moore or Bob Foster ever have been kayoed in one round against the likes of a Danny Green, even when they were diminished by age?

Or Mayweather. As a young guy Mayweather was also a reflex fighter but he read his own skillets better than anyone and became a master tactician later in his career. Roy never adapted. He always fought like he was faster and slicker... even when the younger guy was faster and slicker

Jones always brings out strong feelings either way.

I have been watching boxing very closely since 1977. Roy Jones Jr in his prime is the best fighter I ever saw. Had he retired after Ruiz or the first tarver fight, he may get consideration for GOAT.

His losses all happened after he was past his prime. I think RJJ at 160 or 168 is a favorite over every fighter in history except maybe SRR, and im not positive, SRR was naturally smaller.

RJJ's skill is undersold. He was much more skillful than given credit for. But yes, he did use his athletic ability a lot.

He did things in the ring that noone else could do. He DOMINATED and I mean DOMINATED james toney and EASILY beat Bernard Hopkins.

Stayed too long thats all.

Hes now criminally underrated by many, because they see the losses and "inablility to take a punch" (which magically didnt exist until he was 34 or 35)

Best fighter i ever saw.

Just my opinion.

thesnowman22 wrote: ↑19 Nov 2020, 12:05 Jones always brings out strong feelings either way.

I have been watching boxing very closely since 1977. Roy Jones Jr in his prime is the best fighter I ever saw. Had he retired after Ruiz or the first tarver fight, he may get consideration for GOAT.

His losses all happened after he was past his prime. I think RJJ at 160 or 168 is a favorite over every fighter in history except maybe SRR, and im not positive, SRR was naturally smaller.

RJJ's skill is undersold. He was much more skillful than given credit for. But yes, he did use his athletic ability a lot.

He did things in the ring that noone else could do. He DOMINATED and I mean DOMINATED james toney and EASILY beat Bernard Hopkins.

Stayed too long thats all.

Hes now criminally underrated by many, because they see the losses and "inablility to take a punch" (which magically didnt exist until he was 34 or 35)

Best fighter i ever saw.

Just my opinion.

Agreed

thesnowman22 wrote: ↑19 Nov 2020, 12:05 Jones always brings out strong feelings either way.

I have been watching boxing very closely since 1977. Roy Jones Jr in his prime is the best fighter I ever saw. Had he retired after Ruiz or the first tarver fight, he may get consideration for GOAT.

His losses all happened after he was past his prime. I think RJJ at 160 or 168 is a favorite over every fighter in history except maybe SRR, and im not positive, SRR was naturally smaller.

RJJ's skill is undersold. He was much more skillful than given credit for. But yes, he did use his athletic ability a lot.

He did things in the ring that noone else could do. He DOMINATED and I mean DOMINATED james toney and EASILY beat Bernard Hopkins.

Stayed too long thats all.

Hes now criminally underrated by many, because they see the losses and "inablility to take a punch" (which magically didnt exist until he was 34 or 35)

Best fighter i ever saw.

Just my opinion.

Good post. Pretty much agree with all of it.

I was always disappointed he didn't fight Michalczewski but that could be because I spent a fair bit of time following Dariusz' career quite closely. I think they were both reluctant to travel back then for the same reason, and it wasn't money or fear (not of each other anyway).

Amazingly skilled in his prime, but let's not make him invincible. The Hopkins fight was close and Montell Griffin (no Hall of Famer) had the better of him in the 1st bout.

Don't recall the Hopkins fight being considered close at all, but Griffin did seem to best him for most of fight 1. Mike McCallum looked like he could have beaten him, had he possessed a bit of youth and snap.