BoxRec

Don and Curt had this exactly correct.

BoxBuzz wrote:Don and Curt had this exactly correct.

Peak Roy Jones.

Can't see that for a moment. Jones doesn't make a top 10...not sure he makes a top 20.

Best - I'd have Roy top 5, for sure.

Greatest - a bit lower.

He may have been the best at fighting horrible opponents and clowning around with them. He had a lot of practice.

The best is between Charles, Moore,Tunney, Spinks and if you want to call Langford a light heavyweight. This has been discussed many times.

polecateddy wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Don and Curt had this exactly correct.

Peak Roy Jones.

Not even close IMO. He simply didn't have the quality of opposition necessary to be #1, making it hard to judge how good he actually was. I think he'd have been beaten and likely knocked out by the majority of top light heavyweight greats, such as Tunney, Charles, Moore and Spinks.

Ezzard wrote:Can't see that for a moment. Jones doesn't make a top 10...not sure he makes a top 20.

Amazing how his stock has gone down because he carried on too long. At his peak he was untouchable. And beating young Hopkins and Toney I think points towards a fighter who could have mastered the best of the old school fighters.

polecateddy wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Can't see that for a moment. Jones doesn't make a top 10...not sure he makes a top 20.

Amazing how his stock has gone down because he carried on too long. At his peak he was untouchable. And beating young Hopkins and Toney I think points towards a fighter who could have mastered the best of the old school fighters.

The great Roy Jones, Jr. carried too long fighting third raters, policemen, taxi cab drivers and school teachers. I cannot see him on top 10 light heavy. Maybe a top 20 between 15 and 20 slots. That is about it. To me, he is not a top 50 great pound per pound all-time. He wasted his time with that so much great talent.

polecateddy wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Can't see that for a moment. Jones doesn't make a top 10...not sure he makes a top 20.

Amazing how his stock has gone down because he carried on too long. At his peak he was untouchable. And beating young Hopkins and Toney I think points towards a fighter who could have mastered the best of the old school fighters.

I'd have said it back then too. There was a reason he consistently ducked most top challenges...and his downfall was predicted after the loophole in testing was closed.

Jones isn't even the best of his lifetime...

Ezzard wrote:...and his downfall was predicted after the loophole in testing was closed.

have details on that claim?

Roy Jones jr

polecateddy wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Can't see that for a moment. Jones doesn't make a top 10...not sure he makes a top 20.

Amazing how his stock has gone down because he carried on too long. At his peak he was untouchable. And beating young Hopkins and Toney I think points towards a fighter who could have mastered the best of the old school fighters.

I think you can make an argument for him at or near the top of Super Middle, but his only really significant light heavy opponent was an old Hill (no small scalp that). Would his doubtless extraordinary speed and accuracy have been too much for Moore, Charles or Spinks? I don't think so. I think all would have been too good at imposing their size, made him work harder than he was used to, and stuck one on that chin.

man wrote:

Ezzard wrote:...and his downfall was predicted after the loophole in testing was closed.

have details on that claim?

I did... The article was taken down. Can't remember the journalist's name. Will dig around.

The idea that Jones is the greatest at 175... I guess he was the greatest at dispatching blue collar workers...

Ambling Alp II wrote:The best is between Charles, Moore,Tunney, Spinks and if you want to call Langford a light heavyweight. This has been discussed many times.

I agree with this list.

Langford is probably the greatest of them all (maybe all-time) taking his resume at other weights into consideration but I'd go for Charles #1 at LHW.

I don't have time for the vid, but if their answer is Ezzard Charles than they got it right.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't have time for the vid, but if their answer is Ezzard Charles than they got it right.

They chose Archie Moore. Greatest light heavyweight champion, maybe. But Moore certainly wasnt the best light heavyweight of all time though, that goes to Charles easily.

Oswald wrote:Best - I'd have Roy top 5, for sure.

Greatest - a bit lower.

Roy really has no business in a Lt Heavy top 15, the only guy more overrated as far as accomplishments is Foster. No way should either crack a Top 10. Though both could beat several guys that clearly rate above them. I know a lot of people like to use their head to head opinion, but that is too faulty. We all would have gladly given Roy a win over Tarver if they had never met.

Edit: Before anyone flips out, I don't have an issue with Foster over Roy; but I've seen Bob #1 is this loaded division many times and he doesn't have near the chops for that.

HomicideHenry wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't have time for the vid, but if their answer is Ezzard Charles than they got it right.

They chose Archie Moore. Greatest light heavyweight champion, maybe. But Moore certainly wasnt the best light heavyweight of all time though, that goes to Charles easily.

Agreed, Moore is definitely not even a possible answer. If you want to go Tunney, Greb or Langford at least i don't know for a fact that Ezzard owned them.

I know it's not the question but the most underrated is John henry Lewis.

Why do so many people mention Tunney? He doesn't belong in Top 10. Not by achievements, and not head-to-head either.

Wins over Lewinksky, Greb & Loughran not good enough?

Levinsky was no ATG, solid fighter, but nothing special for a win over him to mean much.

Loughran was a mere boy at the time, weighing almost at middleweight limit, and he still managed to make an even fight out of it (newspapers were split about the winner).

One win over Greb doesn't make one an ATG either. He was badly outpointed two times previous by Greb.

There's been a reappraisal of late of his standings at 175. He used to be highly rated (top five) but is now in the lower reaches of the top 20.

I'd personally have him just outside the top ten but don't care enough to argue about it. I definitely wouldn't have Jones in a top ten either.

People start learning more about Tunney from primary sources, rather than from fairy tales written afterwards, I guess that's the reason for his going down in ratings.

Jones Jr - come back in 10-20 years, and we shall see where he stands in experts' rankings then.

I'm sure most people have read books, or read about Tunney and seen footage before the internet was around.

A lot of the Ring's ratings until the death of Fleischer were heavily steeped in his way of thinking.

I can't for the life of me discern why so many people hold Wilde in such high regard but it still perpetuates to this day as "fact".