Was RJJ too fast at MW to be beaten by anyone? - Page 5

joseph5620

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japanese Boxing

Oh it's hilarious that Froch would have been the biggest puncher RJJ would have ever faced and has an amazing chin, or that Wards skill set is lightyears beyond what RJJ ever had.

Just because I share a different opinion than you it must mean I don't know much about the great overrated RJJ. The dude isn't as good as people make him out to be.

Joe Calaghe > RJJ at SMW too imo. But I must not know much about boxing because my opinion differs.

Froch doesn't punch harder than James Toney did and he's far less skilled too. You don't like Roy Jones jr and your bias comes across as stupidity. That's what's hilarious.

Japanese Boxing · 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joseph5620

Froch doesn't punch harder than James Toney did and he's far less skilled too. You don't like Roy Jones jr and your bias comes across as stupidity. That's what's hilarious.

James Toney's power was generated through counters and well timed shots. After a few counters he had what he needed and was able to put someone into a position to finish. I'd argue that Froch's natural power > Toney's. I wouldn't disagree that Toney was a smarter fighter(just because of his style but overrall idk), but better? He was more fluid to watch, doesn't necessarily mean better. Completely different styles of fighting even though they both worked on the inside.

RubenSonny

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japanese Boxing

James Toney's power was generated through counters and well timed shots. After a few counters he had what he needed and was able to put someone into a position to finish. I'd argue that Froch's natural power > Toney's. I wouldn't disagree that Toney was a smarter fighter(just because of his style but overrall idk), but better? He was more fluid to watch, doesn't necessarily mean better. Completely different styles of fighting even though they both worked on the inside.

You really don't know what you are talking about, Froch is awful on the inside.

The rest of your posts are hilarious.

joseph5620

Quote:

Originally Posted by Japanese Boxing

James Toney's power was generated through counters and well timed shots. I'd argue that Froch's natural power > Toney's. I wouldn't disagree that Toney was a smarter fighter, but better? He was more fluid to watch, doesn't necessarily mean better. Completely different styles of fighting even though they both worked on the inside.

Yeah, like every other professional fighter. Watch Froch struggle with a very faded Jermaine Taylor. Get hurt by Andre Direll and Ward. Then come back and seriously tell me how he blows a prime Roy Jones Jr. out.

Yes, Toney was better than Froch. If you argue against that you can't be taken seriously. When Froch moves to cruiserweight and beats a fighter on the level of Jirov, get back to me.

THE REED™

Froch is better than James Toney.

bojangles1987

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE REED™

Froch is better than James Toney.

People always underestimate Carl Froch. He's the GOAT.

joseph5620

Quote:

Originally Posted by bojangles1987

People always underestimate Carl Froch. He's the GOAT.

I think people overrate him. Especially if you claim he's better than James Toney.

joseph5620

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE REED™

Froch is better than James Toney.

Based on what? Skills or resume?

bojangles1987

Quote:

Originally Posted by joseph5620

I think people overrate him. Especially if you claim he's better than Toney.

Toney's fat. Froch knocks him out.

joseph5620

Quote:

Originally Posted by bojangles1987

Toney's fat. Froch knocks him out.

Okay.........

THE REED™ BEAST MODE Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Erie, PA Posts: 55,082 Rep Power: 200000 Points: 1,023,946,130,560.95 Bank: 22,530,352,006,388,516.00 Total Points: 22,531,375,952,519,076.00 Donate	Froch is better than James Toney.