Who really won the fight? PETER-TONEY

Official record, Peters. But in the eys of most boxing fans, press, and critics, Toney.

i couldn't be bothered staying up to watch this...anyone got/getting the fight uploaded??? here http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88080

115-112 toney

it really depends on the judges, if they like James' counters? or Peter's work rate, or who landed most. I dont know,but it was a crazy decision. That's just the thing.. what work rate? I'll give Peter credit for maintaining stamina throughout all 12 rounds, but stamina means nothing if you don't throw punches with a consistency. Peter was throwing punches in 10-15 second "flurries", while Toney, as a veteran, staying consistent with his attack throughout the fight..

the fight was very close, James has his moments on beginning of a round and Peter will do his own thing on the 2nd half of the round. Okay, that brings up a very good point, something Bernstein also brought up during the fight.. that's all and good, but take how Toney looked in the first half and how Peter looking in the second and who looked better between the two's moments?

it's a similar situation as Taylor-Hopkins 1.. it all comes down to what you favor, hard punchers or effective boxers.. the problem i have with this fight in particular and people saying Peter won is that Peter wasn't effective at all, he'd fight in "flurries" that James easily avoided 9 times out of 10 the whole fight. James effectively avoided shots, then came back with counters of his own that were 10x the effectiveness of his opponent. You don't win a fight by having two or three small rallies in a fight. James only really got hurt once in the 5th, the other times were very minor. I thought James looked good, very good defensively.

fuuuuuuuuuuck i picked peter. ignore one of the peter votes, and put it to toney

bah shit meant to click on toney not peter.. gotta get my head right lol

it's a similar situation as Taylor-Hopkins 1.. it all comes down to what you favor, hard punchers or effective boxers.. the problem i have with this fight in particular and people saying Peter won is that Peter wasn't effective at all, he'd fight in "flurries" that James easily avoided 9 times out of 10 the whole fight. James effectively avoided shots, then came back with counters of his own that were 10x the effectiveness of his opponent. You don't win a fight by having two or three small rallies in a fight.

how could he won when he was outworked, he was rocked, he was hurt, overall Peter landed the telling blows that you could easily see. It is easy to score on this fight. The poll made by Gunstar had 90% of the site saying Toney won. The press row judges had Toney winning, and Al Bernstein had Toney winning. But still there are people saying Peter won, that just shows that everyone watches a fight differently.

how could he won when he was outworked, he was rocked, he was hurt, overall Peter landed the telling blows that you could easily see. It is easy to score on this fight. since it was Toney that outworked and outboxed Peter, yes it was a fairly easy fight to score except for a few close rounds.. Toney was never hurt in the fight, your biased for Peter or just plain blind if you think that. Sure, Toney felt Peter's power maybe 2-3 times in the fight, but he was NEVER in any serious trouble at any point in the fight.. Toney was landing the easy to see blows, while Peter was missing at least 75% of his.. man i want compubox for showtime to shut some of these people up

i couldn't be bothered staying up to watch this...anyone got/getting the fight uploaded???

you can make 10 polls, they'll all favor Toney, cause the big majority thinks he won how could he won when he was outworked, he was rocked, he was hurt, overall Peter landed the telling blows that you could easily see. It is easy to score on this fight.

you can make 10 polls, they'll all favor Toney, cause the big majority thinks he won