The caliber of a fighter can sometimes be judged by the people who challenge him.

It can be argued that Roy Jones Jr is the best boxers to even lace em up, and one of the ways to argue that is to look at 2 fighters from completely different sports that are challenging him. One of them I already mentioned in a previous post, but the other one is new.

After reports surfaced that Dana White had nixed the idea of a fight between Roy Jones Jr and Anderson Silva occuring in the UFC, Strikeforce founder, Scott Coker, agreed to make the fight happen in Strikeforce. Nick Diaz would be fighting Roy Jones Jr.under MMA rules.

“We would absolutely set this fight up. Of course we would have to run it by Showtime for final approval, but I don’t see why we wouldn’t have this fight” -Scott Coker

It now seems that the only hope of seeing one of the legends of boxing stepping into a cage will be through Strikeforce.

Nick Diaz, 20-7-1 wants to fight him. While he does not have the near flawless record of Silva, he is still a top tier fighter in his weight class. One wonders what these fighters see in Roy that makes them want to challenge him? the passionate fighter in me says they want to challenge him because he presents the best challenge boxing wise, but the business fighter in me says they want to challenge him because they know hes getting old and not only will it be an easy victory, but having a win over Roy is surely going to garner publicity and get your name out there.

With Silva, the former is apparent as his attitude is more like Roy, he wants a challenge from a superior opponent, someone that will test his skills, someone that won't leave him bored in the ring. Nick however, is a bit more tricky, I don't think he is all about the money, and his recent actions in the ring (putting his hands down daring opponents to hit him) suggests that he is looking to prove himself. He could go either way, but I lean toward the former based upon the fact that he left the UFC to sign with Gracie championships, if Nick was looking for money and fame, he sure wouldn't have done that.

Update of rule #6

6. There is a 10 error limit and refutation attempt on the blog, if it extends beyond 10 errors or 10 attempts to refute a point you will no longer be allowed to comment on that specific thread, HOWEVER the conversation can continue at my forums. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted.

The new stuff is in bold. Two days to comply.

Rules of the blog

Just like in the UFC and boxing there are rules, these rules are designed among other things to keep the fight from continuing to necessary lengths, (12 round limit) ensure fair play, keep the fight entertaining, and to ensure there is a clear winner. These rules are designed in the same way, to keep the discussions entertaining, ensure fair play, prevent the discussion from continuing to unnecessary lengths..

1. When asked to support your assertion with evidence you will do so or you will admit you either have no evidence or you do not know. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted until you comply with this rule.

2. When asked to answer a question you will do so or you will admit you do not know or you cannot answer the question. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted until you comply with this rule.

3. You will be addressed how you addressed others. Expect the typical smug atheist I know it all attitude to be met with a smug Christian/agnostic/etc. I know it all type attitude, reverse applies as well. An apology will 'reset' someones status and give him a clean slate. If poster X starts name calling and having a smug I know it all attitude, as per the rules he will be treated as he treats others, if he apologizes he will be given a clean slate and treated as if he never name called or had a smug I know it all attitude at all.


4. You will concede any errors or points. This is in regard to overall points, not spelling errors/typos/ or other insignificant errors. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted until you comply with this rule.

5. Link arguing or plagiarizing is not permitted here. Link arguing is when someone asks you to back up your assertion and you simply give them a link or a title of a book and that's it. Plagiarizing is simply copying something from a source without citing the source. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted until you comply with this rule.

6. There is a 10 error limit and refutation attempt on the blog, if it extends beyond 10 errors or 10 attempts to refute a point you will no longer be allowed to comment on that specific thread, HOWEVER the conversation can continue at my forums. Violation of this rule will result in having all subsequent posts deleted.

7. These rules are subject to change, each change will be announced and you have 2 days to comply with the new change.

8. You will NOT blaspheme against the Holy Spirit. Violation of this rule results in a permanent ban.

9. Don't even try to twist and interpret these rules to suit your needs, I made them I know the original meaning and intent of each word rule and the original context of each word and rule.

10. These rules apply to everyone, even me.

11. Comments are limited to the topic and scope of the thread. Any digression will follow with a warning, and continuing with the digression will result in having all posts that digress from the original topic and scope of the thread deleted.