Roy Jones Jr: An all time great of boxing or a con artist?
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 14:26
Was he really an all time great or a con artist that made us believe he was???
BoxRec
Roy Jones Jr: An all time great of boxing or a con artist?
Page 1 of 2
Re: Roy Jones Jr: An all time great of boxing or a con artis
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 14:30
An ATG of boxing.
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 14:40
an all time great...
Re: Roy Jones Jr: An all time great of boxing or a con artis
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 15:01
An all time great.
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 15:06
I am no fan of Roy Jones Jr but I would not have a problem with anyone putting him in their say, top 50 P4P all times list.
Where he would fit in in that 50 is another question all together.
Where he would fit in in that 50 is another question all together.
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 17:18
Funny thing is if he would have stepped out after his first fight with Tarver Or after Ruiz no one would be asking this.
So why would what he acheived become undone?
He's a great...just a great who stayed in a bit long.......so what's new?
So why would what he acheived become undone?
He's a great...just a great who stayed in a bit long.......so what's new?
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 17:24
Decagon wrote:HE WAS AN ALL-TIME GREAT BECAUSE I'M USING BIGGER FONT THAN ELMERSALSA IS!
YEAH HE IS AN ATG BUT YOUR COLORS AREN'T AS GOOD AS MINE
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 18:07
you can't see mine, but RJJr is a ATG.
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 18:10
ATG
Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 19:05
A con artist in what sense?
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 03:54
An all time great...fun to watch...and if he couldn't take a punch, isn't it just amazing it took 15 years to find out!
re
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 04:36
All-Time Great...No ifs ands, or buts about it!!!
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 12:27
In terms of genuine natural talent there can be little argument against Jones being considered one of the great fighters of modern times.
If only he'd have allowed himself to be involved in a few up and down wars against fighters who were several levels beneath him, or rematched fighters who he clearly beat first time around, then maybe there wouldn't be pointless questions like this one.
If only he'd have allowed himself to be involved in a few up and down wars against fighters who were several levels beneath him, or rematched fighters who he clearly beat first time around, then maybe there wouldn't be pointless questions like this one.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 13:35
Decagon wrote:One time, I was driving through Pensacola, on the way to taking my family to Disney World, when I got a flat tire right outside of Roy Jones's estate! He walked out through the gate and said, "Don't worry. I have a full-service garage out behind the outdoor basketball court, but you know, I'll have to charge you." He had this guy tow our car to the garage, and he said that we needed a new tire.
My family and I watched as Roy Jones practiced choking his chickens while the mechanic began changing the tire. I felt lucky that he happened to have the exact tire we needed. $150 didn't seem like too much to pay either, given the alternatives, and we left. Then, 15 miles down the road, the tire went flat again! Roy Jones simply put a cheap bicycle patch on my tire and painted it black! He's a con man.
Ha Ha....nope that weren't Roy...that was his look alike cousin Ray.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 13:45
All time great, though should have fought the WBO champ Daruis Michalczewski in the 90s
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 14:09
He has to be ranked as an ATG & he's certainly, arguably, the most naturally gifted boxer that ever lived.
I can't, however, rank him with the Sugar Ray's of the world.
He never even fought, never mind beat the best fighters of his era, which is something that an elite ATG needs to do IMO.
I can't, however, rank him with the Sugar Ray's of the world.
He never even fought, never mind beat the best fighters of his era, which is something that an elite ATG needs to do IMO.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 14:45
shouldn't he fight Manny Siaca next????
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 14:45
Toney? Hopkins? Hill?Syntax Error wrote:He has to be ranked as an ATG & he's certainly, arguably, the most naturally gifted boxer that ever lived.
I can't, however, rank him with the Sugar Ray's of the world.
He never even fought, never mind beat the best fighters of his era, which is something that an elite ATG needs to do IMO.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 15:49
Benn, Eubank, Collins, Michalzewski, Ottke, Calazaghe?pundit wrote:Toney? Hopkins? Hill?Syntax Error wrote:He has to be ranked as an ATG & he's certainly, arguably, the most naturally gifted boxer that ever lived.
I can't, however, rank him with the Sugar Ray's of the world.
He never even fought, never mind beat the best fighters of his era, which is something that an elite ATG needs to do IMO.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 15:52
....rate all below the three folks listed above, with the possible exception of DM.Syntax Error wrote:Benn, Eubank, Collins, Michalzewski, Ottke, Calazaghe?pundit wrote:Toney? Hopkins? Hill?Syntax Error wrote:He has to be ranked as an ATG & he's certainly, arguably, the most naturally gifted boxer that ever lived.
I can't, however, rank him with the Sugar Ray's of the world.
He never even fought, never mind beat the best fighters of his era, which is something that an elite ATG needs to do IMO.
Posted: 22 Nov 2006, 17:30
I think he's easily an ATG. I don't agree with the guys who say he's not becasue he was never in a war or faced adversity-if he was so good in his prime, why put himself in that position. As for not taking a punch well, I dont think thats true. He took plenty of good shots-including heavyweight-then gets KO'd by lightpunching Johnoson? No. He just got older and his resitance went. We all get old. It's just a shame he didnt know when the right time to retire was but then, do they ever?
Posted: 23 Nov 2006, 09:26
Jones was definitely a great fighter. The problem for me was that he was heralded as the second coming. He was a great fighter with a limited resume. But he can make a p4p top 100 or maybe top 50.
Posted: 23 Nov 2006, 12:08
Roy Jones Jr: An all time great of boxing or a con artist?
Answer is.....
Both.....
Answer is.....
Both.....
Posted: 24 Nov 2006, 08:05
roy had to beat those guys (toney, hopkins, hill) to be recognised as the top guy in the division, (hell, even calzaghe had to fight eubank) but once he was crowned the main man he definately started to hop around the divisions when in the main tougher fights were out there, on paper at least.pundit wrote:....rate all below the three folks listed above, with the possible exception of DM.Syntax Error wrote:Benn, Eubank, Collins, Michalzewski, Ottke, Calazaghe?pundit wrote: Toney? Hopkins? Hill?
the europeans mentioned may not have been in jones class as fighters but they were of good enough standard to leave question marks legacy wise about a fighter who`s considered an all time p4p great.
you`ve even mentioned yourself about how brutal a puncher ottke is once he sits on his punches
, who`s to say this brutal, bad ass of a puncher wouldnt have iced jones?the questions are there.
Posted: 24 Nov 2006, 12:58
my all time favorite, so this answers easy..
not many boxers go from a toned 156 to 200 winning championship belts from middle to heavy... i dont care if its john ruiz he beat, he still did it.
wish he would have retired, or stayed at HW and invited tarver up there.. unfortunitely he picked the wrong path, drop back down to 175.
not many boxers go from a toned 156 to 200 winning championship belts from middle to heavy... i dont care if its john ruiz he beat, he still did it.
wish he would have retired, or stayed at HW and invited tarver up there.. unfortunitely he picked the wrong path, drop back down to 175.