How do you rank Roy and Tyson on the top 20 all time list

Discussion in 'Boxing Discussion' started by Hirashin, Jul 25, 2020.

  1. Woldog твоя мама гей

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2017
    Messages:
    3,848
    Likes Received:
    617
    Location:
    Van Diemen's Land
    RJJ was top 10 until he took a dive against Danny Green and started getting knocked out every 6 months.
     
  2. StewDogg11 Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,836
    Likes Received:
    288
    Sorry I should have said informed boxing fans/historians. The same casuals who voted him in the Top 5 probably have no clue who Henry Armstrong even is. For instance The Ring had Tyson at #72.
     
  3. don't quote me! Orange Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2018
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    15
    Floyd and Roy are my 2 favourite fighters of the last 30 yrs, but I would put floyd at no.1 of the 2

    Age is the best way to determine 'the same points' somebody is at in their career. Not number of fights, otherwise lomachenko be the joint best fighter of all time, alongside Muangsurin , as they won world titles in their 3rd fight!

    If you reword it as saying; Roy is better of both fighters up until the age of 34, that would be
    more reasonable,even if I would slightly give the edge to floyd by that measure aswell.
     
  4. jeremyemilio Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    12,874
    Likes Received:
    162
    Well... but that's just as bad. Maybe worse. I've never really liked Tyson much as a fighter, but I don't see how you don't get him into the top 30 or 40. I get that he didn't respond very well to adversity of any sort, and he doesn't have the greatest strength of competition, and he fell off earlier than he should have for a host of reasons. Nevertheless, he's a heavyweight with a reasonably long period of dominance who, in his prime, has a very legit shot at beating any other boxer who has ever lived.
     
  5. StewDogg11 Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,836
    Likes Received:
    288
    Well by that sentiment you should have Tyson ranked above Mayweather Jr. I mean he’d totally win if they ever fought.
     
  6. jeremyemilio Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    12,874
    Likes Received:
    162
    I don't think it's as simple as choosing one or the other between age and number of fights in determining where a fighter is in his career. Both are relevant.

    But, regardless, the real point I was making was that Roy could have retired after Ruiz or Tarver I, and called it a career, and everyone would have ranked him very near Floyd, all time, and most would have ranked him above Floyd, in my opinion. (I remember when Floyd and Roy were both in their prime. No one at that time was ranking Floyd above Roy.)

    That's not to say that you can just go back and look at someone's career until they start losing and play "What if he had retired on his last win?" But when comparing Roy and Floyd I feel like it's worth noting that Roy cut his dominance short because he was so dominant that he (and everyone else) was bored with his career, and so he challenged himself by going up to grab a strap at HW. Contrariwise, Floyd was extremely risk averse in his match making (not to mention in the ring) and the result was fewer fights on one hand, and a longer period of dominance on the other.

    Personally, I give more credit to Roy's approach than Floyd's. But I don't want to go too far with that. I'm not suggesting that every fighter should be taking the PJ Penn route, and be respected for screwing up a career and losing way more fights than he should. Just that Roy had already had a very full career. He could have turned into a one fight per year guy and left the sport a few years later with 4 or 5 more wins on the record, but instead decided to go out with a bang. His mistake was that he didn't leave.

    Anyway, I probably spoke too strongly in declaring that Roy should unquestionably be ranked above Floyd. That comes down to a question of a bunch of factors and what you appreciate most in a fighter in the way they fight and in the way they put their career together. But I stand by the idea that Roy needs to be somewhere in the range of Floyd when we rank him. At present, Roy is a little bit underrated, and Floyd a little bit overrated. But I actually don't expect that to last. Once both are good and retired and well in the past, 20 or 30 years from now, I expect they'll be getting around the same level of love.
     
  7. jeremyemilio Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    12,874
    Likes Received:
    162
    It's not the only consideration, by any stretch. But, yes, who wins in a head to head fight matters. That's why such a large percentage of the fighters that most see as being in the top 10 or 20 of all time are Heavyweights.
     
  8. StewDogg11 Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,836
    Likes Received:
    288
    How many times has a Heavyweight sat atop the P4P rankings? Also only two Heavyweights were in The Ring’s Top 10.
     
  9. don't quote me! Orange Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2018
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    15
    You are right everybody rated Roy ahead of floyd until 2003, as floyd was about 26 and Roy about 34, my point is, if you level up the ages, it was close, with a marginal edge for floyd IMO

    I think both guys were fairly calculating when it came to choosing opponents (Jones was actually favourite vs ruiz)

    To make out there was a huge difference in risk taking is exaggeration IMO. As others have pointed out, many criticised (harshly IMO) Roy throughout his career for not taking certain challenges. FLoyd didn't fight as frequently overall as Roy correct, but this can largely be attributed to as from 2007 onwards he became a megastar and would only fight at certain times of the yr, for big money fights and it needed a lot of stars to align, he went from 2007 - 2013 fighting about 6 times in that period. It doesn't automatically mean fear or shear avoidance.
    After fighting Hagler, sugar ray leonard fought 3 times in 4 yrs. Oscar did the same after fighting Hopkins.
     
  10. jeremyemilio Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    12,874
    Likes Received:
    162
    Agreed. I think most great fighters do that. Just pointing out that Roy didn't. And it bit him in the ass. I'm not inclined to penalize him for it, because he had a full career before that. I don't remember anyone really suggesting Roy ever played it safe. The complaints were mostly that, through no real fault if his own, he just didn't have anyone to fight. Had he stayed put, slowed his schedule down, and made easy work of Tarver (which is the most likely alternate scenario, in my opinion, although a lot of people would disagree), there would still be complaints that he had no one to really challenge him. And yes, the smart money was definitely on Roy to beat Ruiz. The risk was going up to HW and thinking he could come back down the same fighter and continue on with a dominant career. Ruiz wasn't a great heavyweight, but he was legit, meaning Roy had to pack on some pounds. Just too much stress on the body to then try to lose lean mass without losing power and speed.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.