Roy Jones & Bob Foster. 12 Rds...

Two guys often touted as legends of 175, in spite of having limited resumes.

Who do we favour? I am leaning toward the ever-oversold Jones here, having watched some recent Foster, but theres room for persuasion.

 

12 rounds, it's better for Roy there, but I still would never pick a 175 fighter over Foster with any certainty at all

15, gimme Foster

 

Basically a tightrope walk for Roy. I'd slightly lean towards Foster

 

since Roy lost maybe 2 rounds at 175 in a decade and Foster fought when guys are tough this is an easy pick.

Roy should be a 95% favorite, Foster would have to land a bomb and then more bombs, and he really just wasn't that fast.

 

:atu:

 

That post almost convinces me to back Foster.

 

I know it's not fashionable, but based on the tape I've seen, I just think Roy was a better fighter. :dunno:

 

Based upon the tape you've seen what would be your all time hockey team?

 

Roy was pretty useful.

 

He was pretty fast from recollection.

Not "Expeditious" Erik McGrorkal fast, but still fast.

 

Fastest fighter of all time, in my book. But you wonder about his chin.

 

I would have to pick Roy. Just too damn fast. Like Hut said, fastest fighter ever, P4P. A light heavyweight with the speed of a fast featherweight.

Foster was very good, but I think he'd have trouble hitting Roy flush enough to change the fight.

 

Quite possibly but Foster wasn't a guy with a big punch and nothing else. He has more than just the "puncher's chance".

 

I agree, I like Foster. He had pretty good skills and range, and awesome hookercuts etc.

However he was by no means quick at 175, and I think the speed disparity and agility of a prime Roy would be too much.

The weird thing is, we don't REALLY know what kind of chin a prime Roy had.

Foster could have blasted him more cleanly than anyone else he fought at 168/175, but who knows how well Roy could have taken it.

 

Exactly. I don't think Roy had a glass chin but i think it's more than fair to say it was far from granite. Jones would have to fight kind of in a "tight-rope" manner. Foster had a very long reach. He wouldn't have to chase Jones around only to get pot-shotted.

 

Foster had terrific handspeed and his jab was simply incredible... That jab would create a huge amount of problems for Roy

 

Even though the recipe for this fight is that Jones boxes and Foster chases, it must be noted that Jones too can score a KO here. I'd say this is 60/40 Roy kicks his ass

 

I suppose, but if a knockout comes in this one chances are it's Roy being the one on the wrong end of it.

 

It is most likely yes, but I wanted to point out that this is not your typical boxer vs puncher bout since both could do both. Foster wouldn't be able to go all-out aggressive and Jones couldn't pot shot all the way. That's what makes this interesting

 

Agreed.

 

I can see Roy finding a place for the lead right hand, though Im sure Foster would adapt

 

Foster probably has a better chance than I'm indicating, because range and jab is probably the best way to neutralise speed.

It's just that Jones was so freakishly fast for a man of his size, so compared to other fast fighters, the difference in speed was much more, because he was fighting light heavyweights.

 

Im not sure Jones ever fought a light heavyweight as fast as Foster, never mind as good. I wish we could see this fight it'd be amazing. I really lean towards Bob though

 

As fast? Not sure, but certainly not as good.

 

Obviously not as good, or even close, but fast? Not sure, Foster never struck me as particularly speedy, even for a 175 pounder.

 

Foster was a minmalist with his movement but in terms of his hand speed he was damn fast. I cant think of a faster guy Roy fought off the top of my head......Montel Griffith compares and he gave Roy some real problems. I can see Bob executing a broadly similar fight plan/style but with every success multiplied by just how hard he hit. And the fact he was flat out better than Griffith.

 

Griffin was quicker imo than Foster, but such a different style of fighter that the speed factor is irrelevant between them.

 

Let me back track a little on the speed talk. I watched Ali-Foster this morning and was very impressed with how Foster seemed to outspeed Ali and it fogged my brain a bit. He was sharp on the trigger and disguised his punches nicely, but not as fast as I've claimed here

 

I see similarities in how Griffith fought Roy and how Foster would

 

Foster was no sloth but his own speed wouldn't be a factor. It would be more how he coped with Roy's as that's where the signifcant difference is.