Boxing legend Roy Jones knows more about world title fights than most and gave an epic breakdown of Bivol vs Beterbiev.

Mayweather On Mexico Controversy

Dmitry Bivol and Artur Beterbiev collide in a light-heavyweight undisputed fight for the ages on Saturday night, October 12th in Saudi Arabia.

Speaking to Fight Hub Roy Jones gave one heck of a breakdown:

“My synopsis is this: Beterbiev is a great puncher, but he’s been down a few times. What does that tell me? A lot of people say it was balance, or this, or that. In my humble opinion, if you’ve been down two or three times already, being the puncher that you are, it means you’re either leaving yourself in a bad position when you throw punches or you don’t take a punch as well as you throw. Both would be mistakes against Bivol because he stays fundamentally sound with his feet and his hands. He’s a very disciplined fighter, always in shape, and always going to be Demetri Bivol.

If you do anything out of the ordinary, like throw too hard and get off balance or don’t take a punch as well as you throw, you’re going to lose to Bivol. If you can go out there and smash people early or get him into an exchange and knock him out, that’s not out of the picture, because we’re talking about a guy with a 100% knockout ratio. You understand me? Anything can happen.

However, I feel like in 10-ounce gloves, nobody wants to be hit by a decent puncher, right? We’ve all punched hard enough to keep Canelo in check. Canelo has been one of the pound-for-pound best for a long time. So, what makes me think that Bivol doesn’t punch hard enough to catch Beterbiev when he’s off balance or just catch him in general and hurt him? In a sense, it’s like a pick ‘em fight, but it’s about who hits who first and who can withstand whose punch. If Bivol can take Beterbiev’s punch, Beterbiev is going to have problems. If Beterbiev can take Bivol’s punch, Bivol will have to work for a long time. But if Bivol can’t take Beterbiev’s punch, that 100% knockout ratio is going to remain intact.

Personally, I think Bivol’s footwork is going to be the key. His feet are going to keep him out of the wrong exchanges with Beterbiev, and they will also create opportunities for him when Beterbiev misses with big shots. Historically, does it usually favor the fighter with quicker feet and better hands when they go against a power puncher?

It’s close, but it’s a little different. These guys from the Eastern Bloc are different than what we see here. Stylistically, it’s different because they are both very good technicians. They both know the game inside and out. They’re not as flashy as Sugar Ray Leonard or Tommy Hearns, but they are much more disciplined in their skills. It’s a different type of chess match.

I wonder if Bivol is going to find himself in a “you’re blowing it” moment. If you’re blowing it, it’s going to be too late with Beterbiev; you won’t get a chance to recover before he hits you. If you’re blowing it, you probably already blew it because he hits too hard for that.

I know these pound-for-pound discussions don’t really count for much, but given his track record and the fact that he’s the smaller guy, would you place Bivol at number one?

I couldn’t place him at number one because nobody has ever beaten Terence Crawford either. But Bivol would definitely be in the top two or three. For his size and what he’s doing to his opponents, which are not necessarily bad opponents, the way he’s doing it shows that he deserves to be in that top three, without a question.

When it comes to a fighter like Bivol, what ultimately beats him? Is it size or age?

Probably size and time. You could run into someone too big for him, or father time could catch up with him.

We’ll see. I always tell people to think about it. The fact is, who have we ever seen TKO a top-ranked fighter just by hitting their arms? Roy Jones Jr. did it against Eric Harding, but before that, no one had ever done it.

Exactly. How much skill does it take to knock a guy out with his hands behind his back? It’s crazy. But Bivol definitely has the capability of becoming something we’ve never seen before. If he gets the right opponents and pulls more out of himself, he could do things differently than anyone else has.

I imagine you’ve been keeping up with the changes in boxing. A lot is happening, especially with the disruption that a promoter like Eddie Hearn has caused by wanting to lower pay-per-view costs and putting on these big fights. How do you see this playing out in the next few years?

Honestly, I don’t delve that deeply into it. There will be a lot of changes, I’m sure, but he has the kind of money that could change things. The only thing is that it’s going to be good for the top-level fighters but rough for those at the bottom trying to make their way up. He might inadvertently create a bigger gap. For instance, a guy like Jared Anderson, who is developing slowly, might not get that chance to skip the development stage and be thrust into the spotlight.

You have to be careful about how you move these fighters. There’s a reason certain promoters, like Top Rank and Golden Boy, know how to position fighters to get them to the top. Sometimes we think we want to see the big fights, and yes, we do, but we also want to make sure those fighters are ready for that level before they compete.

He plans to create a boxing league where he has a majority of the fighters under one umbrella, similar to the UFC. Do you think that can work given the structure of boxing?

It probably could, but boxing is much older and has always been solidified by being a title holder. It’s going to be tough unless there’s one title that everyone has the chance to fight for. In boxing, everyone used to have a chance; in the UFC, you have to get in to have a shot. But because of the UFC’s structure, boxing may be forced to adapt.

The good thing is boxing fans will get the fights they want, but the downside is that a lot of guys who would typically get opportunities may not anymore because of the new structure.

Is it better to have a single organization in boxing, or is it better to have the current structure?

To me, it would be good to have a single organization for the sake of competition. However, one organization would struggle to accommodate all the fighters. That’s why so many different organizations exist. You can’t house everyone under one roof. If one organization is bigger than the rest, like the UFC, they’re doing a great job housing most of the top names.

But sometimes, when those household names leave, they can go to other platforms and become just as big. You see that with fights happening outside the UFC that become major events.

So, different changes will come, and they might bring better fights. However, smaller fighters may still suffer.

How do we avoid that? What do you propose needs to happen?

I haven’t really thought about it deeply. When you’re fighting, you think about these things, but when you’re not in that environment, you focus on developing your fighters to the level where they can compete.

There has to be a way for smaller fighters to still have opportunities. One organization might not be the answer. However, when I was around, we had three organizations: the WBA, WBC, and IBF. If you even add the WBO, you have four organizations, which can provide multiple chances for fighters to become champions.

You want to have an undisputed champion at times, but you also want to allow opportunities for others to become champions. Back in Ali’s days, there were other potential heavyweight champions who never had the chance because Ali held the title.

When you have more than one belt or more than one way to become a champion, you create opportunities. Removing those chances can kill dreams, and that’s not what boxing has always been about.”