"We're not worthy!
By Ace Freeman
FightFan.com’s Ace Freeman talks about James Toney’s showcase of pugilism in a disputed decision “loss” to Samuel Peter last Saturday night, where it leaves him now, and the future of boxing’s premiere division.
September 3, 2006
Just three weeks removed from being asked to shell out $50 American to watch Oleg Maskaev and Hasim Rahman in a championship bout of have nots, James “Lights out” Toney put on a rarely seen clinic under the big bright lights at the Staples Center in Los Angeles California at no charge to television subscribers. Over 70lbs from where he began his Hall of Fame career, a 38 year old 5’9 James Toney climbed into the ring (amidst a great deal of doubt) to stand toe to toe with one of the biggest and strongest punchers in the Heavyweight division in Samuel “The Nigerian Nightmare” Peter.
After 3 years being accused of not fighting a real Heavyweight puncher, Toney began the fight aggressively working behind a steady and effective jab. Showing zero signs of intimidation James stood in the center of the ring and bent carefree at the waist to avoid several telegraphed dive bomb shots from the hulking Samuel Peter. With his trade mark slipping of punches that is rarely seen at Heavyweight, Toney smiled and won the first two rounds looking like he was merely warming up.
Samuel Peter looked tense as he winged hard looping punches at an elusive target. The crisp sound of Toney’s well placed counter shots rung out like someone hitting a suitcase with rubber mallet. Peter had his moments in the third round as the blunt force behind some of his shots would move Toney back. But back was also where Toney elected to be on occasion as it negated the distance Peter relies on for power when he’s up close to his opponent.
Peter would look to tag a possum Toney laying against the ropes, but was largely met with well placed counter hooks. Over and over Toney would negate a big shot and counter with a cleanly placed hook tucked in like a magic piece of a fistic puzzle.
There were two instances in the 5th and 10th rounds where Samuel Peter caught James Toney at the end of a shot he’s loaded up on, and to his credit he genuinely seemed to stun him. But in each case a savvy Toney covered up and maneuvered out of harms way. The 38 year old former middleweight stood in with one of the most feared punchers in the Heavyweight division and took his powerful punches in stride. The same shots that had IBF titleist Wladimir Klitschko stepping in potholes and hitting the deck several times only momentarily deterred James Toney from standing toe to toe with the younger larger Peter in the center of the ring.
The championship rounds seemed eerily similar to the rounds that preceded them. Toney opened the rounds jabbing and landing at will, and Peter lumbered forward in the middle of the round missing or grazing Toney with the majority of his shots. James would mix in crisp counter shots to the body and head, and most rounds concluded with Toney having landed more punches to Peter’s smaller punch output being overshadowed by his even lower connect percentage.
In the end that was the story of the fight. Toney seemed to clearly land at a much higher rate, while Peter could boast of landing a few hard shots in between a much higher number of missed or glancing blows.
“But Peter landed the much Heavier shots” some might say to me. Yes, he did in rounds 3, 5, and 10 which is the main reason I scored those rounds for him. But outside of that he was largely ineffective, and was swinging and missing at a smaller target that was out landing him in the midst of a pugilistic showcase.
The sport is called boxing, and James Toney is one of the few remaining active fighters worthy of wearing an Ezzard Charles T-Shirt to a weigh in. On one September long weekend that will soon subside into a sea of mediocrity that has been the Heavyweight division this decade, a 38 year old former Middleweight climbed into the ring at heavyweight and outfoxed one of it’s biggest brutes.
He didn’t get the decision, but perhaps it’s best that James Toney leaves us on this note. It seems abundantly clear most of the present era is more concerned with the roundness of his physique than the window he offers of a look into the past where fighters like Archie Moore once showed a troupe of bigger men that true pugilism negates physical gifts and sheer size.
In a division where fighters who have no business being ranked in the top ten can unjustly move into a title fight and upset a champion more times than not, perhaps it’s best a 38 year old James Toney doesn’t linger around anymore. He can comfortably retire and walk around at these events where the current top heavyweights would be privileged just to shake the hand of a five division three time Champion.
Let Boxing’s premiere division stand on it’s own legs as promoters jockey for positioning to make you pay $49.95 to watch the likes Nikolay Valuev taking on Monte “Two gunz” Barrett. James “Lights Out” Toney is in better company standing on the laurels of his historic 78 fight career where his renowned boxing ability won’t look so out of place among the lumbering giants. Apparently he’s too robust anyway."
http://www.fightfan.com/articles/0806-Not-Worthy.htm
No even rounds? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt the judges in this fight score a few rounds even?
I know I had one round 9-9 and another 10-10. It was hard to give some rounds to either of them when Toney only controlled the first half of the round and then let Peter take the other half.Two judges who got Peter.. had round 9th round as a 9-9 (point deduction) the judge that had Toney had the round as 8-10.
I posted the copy of the score cards, or go to fightnews.com to view it.
If one of Peter's shots was worth 10 of Toney's, then why was Peter's face bloodied and swollen at the end of the fight and why didn't Toney have a mark on him. Even more so, why wasn't Toney knocked out if Peter hits that hard.
That's the issue here. Peter is getting too much credit for his perceived power. If his power was actually being used effectively, Toney shouldn't have been standing and should have been battered and bruised. He wasn't, but for some reason Peter was.
If one punch knocks a man back to the point to where it's obvioius he's the stronger fighter, it make a difference.
Peter got hit more because Toney wasn't really hurting him and he felt no need to cover up; but of course if you hit a man enough, blood vessels will break and his face will swell and bleed, whether you rattle him or not.
I'm not arguing that Toney didn't hit him more...of course he did...it's about perception during the 3:00 minute round.
I have no arguent that Toney won the fight; he did, clearly. I went back and watched the fight again; and the two 10-10 rounds I'd scored, I ended up spliting...the 9-9 round I'd scored I ended up changing to a 10-8 round for Toney, which made my finally tally 115-112 for James.
My whole point is that there is more to scoring a professional prize fight that just clean punching, which is how the amateurs are scored. In several of the rounds, Peter had one punch that equaled 10 of Toney's.....power and perceived dominance is what Professional boxing is all about. If one fighter has the edge in power, the other one better make him look like an amateur to win clearly.....James, in some rounds, did that; but as has been the case throughout his career....most notably against Dave Tiberri.....he took time off in some rounds, which counts against him; and is why I say he didn't "dominate", persay. If James had fought all fight as he did in his spurts, he would have easily dominated the less-learned Peter. His sporatic inactivity is what has always driven me nuts as far as Toney is concened.....and what I was trying to emphasise.
If one of Peter's shots was worth 10 of Toney's, then why was Peter's face bloodied and swollen at the end of the fight and why didn't Toney have a mark on him. Even more so, why wasn't Toney knocked out if Peter hits that hard.
That's the issue here. Peter is getting too much credit for his perceived power. If his power was actually being used effectively, Toney shouldn't have been standing and should have been battered and bruised. He wasn't, but for some reason Peter was.
No even rounds? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt the judges in this fight score a few rounds even?
I know I had one round 9-9 and another 10-10. It was hard to give some rounds to either of them when Toney only controlled the first half of the round and then let Peter take the other half.
Diego has no idea what he's talking about. He's an angry little college kid who's been watching boxing for a year and a half.
He heard someone say judges are discouraged from scoring even rounds (which is true to an extent) and he somehow thinks that translates into no one being allowed to score even rounds ever.
Judges score even rounds all the time.
He has no idea what he's talking about. ;)
That proves it right there. You score even rounds, which is a cop-out for anybody who's fighter is being dominated. There are no even rounds without point deductions or knockdowns. Not in this day and age.
No even rounds? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didnt the judges in this fight score a few rounds even?
I know I had one round 9-9 and another 10-10. It was hard to give some rounds to either of them when Toney only controlled the first half of the round and then let Peter take the other half.
More to, yes. But clean and effective punching is the most important of the factors. Not saying the others should be ignored.
Here's a good write up on scoring:
Outside of throwing and landing more shots, Toney made Peter miss wildly. Peter's agression was a very small factor because of how infrequent he was able to land a clean shot.
Toney's punches were clean and crisp and in abundance.
I don't think this was a difficult fight to score.
All of those scoring criteria I am familiar with; but thank you. As for the difficulty of the scoring, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I noticed when I rewatched it that Al Bernstein stated several times that it was a difficult fight to score, so I don't feel unjustifed in saying it was.
Perception is a large part of scoring a fight....and Toney's "time-outs" didn't help him in this regard.
My whole point is that there is more to scoring a professional prize fight that just clean punching, which is how the amateurs are scored. In several of the rounds, Peter had one punch that equaled 10 of Toney's.....power and perceived dominance is what Professional boxing is all about.
More to, yes. But clean and effective punching is the most important of the factors. Not saying the others should be ignored.
Here's a good write up on scoring:
CLEAN PUNCHING: As stated earlier this is the most easily recognized of all the categories. Sharp crisp stinging jabs, clean flush right hands, short tight hooks and uppercuts. These are the punches that stand out and catch the eye. The fighter who is landing these punches is most likely controlling the fight regardless of the other three categories!
EFFECTIVE AGGRESSION: I believe this is the most misinterpreted of the four categories. Effective aggression is more than just a fighter moving forward. Effective aggression is what Frazier did to Ali in Super Fight I. Effective aggression is what Duran did to Leonard in their first fight. What Frazier and Duran did was score effectively and cleanly as they were moving forward carrying the action setting the pace. The effective aggressor must be scoring and landing. A good example of what effective aggression isn't, is what we saw in the Chavez-Whitaker fight. Yes, Chavez was the aggressor throughout the fight, but he wasn't scoring cleanly if at all while applying the pressure. The same applies in the Hopkins-Trinidad bout. Trinidad was moving towards Hopkins but in the process was getting hit pretty regularly and was easily being outscored. While Trinidad was the aggressor, he wasn't landing or scoring, his aggression was completely neutralized by Hopkins. The effective aggressor must be connecting with clean punches while not being tattooed on the way in.
RING GENERALSHIP: This also is somewhat left up to an individuals interpretation. Basically ring general ship is the fighter exhibiting the cleaner and more professional boxing form and skill. Another words, he looks like a professional fighter, and not some wild swinging novice. He shows his skill in throwing his punches correctly and understands how to impose what he wants to do in the ring while negating what his opponent is trying to do. Ring generalship also is when a fighter can dictate the flow of the fight in order to breakdown his opponents style. Another example would be a fighter going to the body if the opponent has protected his face well, leaving the body as the more viable target.
DEFENSE: Defense is pretty much self explanatory. This category is basically how a fighter protects himself in the ring. Defense is making your opponent miss with his punches. This can be achieved a number of ways. A fighter can use his legs to move away from the punch, or he can slip to one side or the other to make the punch miss. He also can block the shot with his gloves and arms by keeping his elbows in and his hands up so he is in position to nullify and block the punch.
All four categories are important while trying to score a fight but, it's quite obvious that clean punching and effective aggression are what really dictates who wins the round. Clean punching is what both fighters try to do from the onset of every bout. The goal in the fight is to subdue the opponent. To do this a fighter must use his hands to strike his opposition in order to render him unconscious or ineffective to gain control of the fight. The only way one fighter can gain the advantage over his opponent is to strike him, it's really quite simple. Without one fighter scoring and landing clean punches, effective aggression, ring generalship, and defense are a non-factor.
Outside of throwing and landing more shots, Toney made Peter miss wildly. Peter's agression was a very small factor because of how infrequent he was able to land a clean shot.
Toney's punches were clean and crisp and in abundance.
I don't think this was a difficult fight to score.
You're right that Diego doesn't know how to score fights.
But he got this one right, as did a vast majority of the boxing fans and media.
Not a difficult fight to score.
Toney out threw, out landed, and made Peter miss the majority of the fight.
Peter's connect % was low, he landed very few flush shots (clean effective punching), and his agressivness wasn't effecitve.
When you see 80 -85 % of this site voting that Toney won, it says something. That's a huge chunk of people who dislike Toney voting .
The polls everywhere were the same wide split.
I have no arguent that Toney won the fight; he did, clearly. I went back and watched the fight again; and the two 10-10 rounds I'd scored, I ended up spliting...the 9-9 round I'd scored I ended up changing to a 10-8 round for Toney, which made my finally tally 115-112 for James.
My whole point is that there is more to scoring a professional prize fight that just clean punching, which is how the amateurs are scored. In several of the rounds, Peter had one punch that equaled 10 of Toney's.....power and perceived dominance is what Professional boxing is all about. If one fighter has the edge in power, the other one better make him look like an amateur to win clearly.....James, in some rounds, did that; but as has been the case throughout his career....most notably against Dave Tiberri.....he took time off in some rounds, which counts against him; and is why I say he didn't "dominate", persay. If James had fought all fight as he did in his spurts, he would have easily dominated the less-learned Peter. His sporatic inactivity is what has always driven me nuts as far as Toney is concened.....and what I was trying to emphasise.
Hey, it's not my fault that you obvioiusly:
1. Love James Toney so much that you fall into that category of fans who watch your favorite fighter more than the fight.
&
2. Obviously have no clue as to how to score a professional prize fight.
You're right that Diego doesn't know how to score fights.
But he got this one right, as did a vast majority of the boxing fans and media.
Not a difficult fight to score.
Toney out threw, out landed, and made Peter miss the majority of the fight.
Peter's connect % was low, he landed very few flush shots (clean effective punching), and his agressivness wasn't effecitve.
When you see 80 -85 % of this site voting that Toney won, it says something. That's a huge chunk of people who dislike Toney voting .
The polls everywhere were the same wide split.
Easy work for Toney. The fight wasn't close at all, so don't try to save face by saying it was, K-Dogg. You made a bold prediction, but you were completely wrong on this one. Toney dominated that fight in terms of rounds. If you can find 5 rounds to give to Peter, then you are reaching really hard.
Hey, it's not my fault that you obvioiusly:
1. Love James Toney so much that you fall into that category of fans who watch your favorite fighter more than the fight.
&
2. Obviously have no clue as to how to score a professional prize fight.
That proves it right there. You score even rounds, which is a cop-out for anybody who's fighter is being dominated. There are no even rounds without point deductions or knockdowns. Not in this day and age.
Do you have to insist on being such a complete dumb-ass?
Seriously. I don't have "a fighter"....there's not one fighter out there I care about over another one. They're all the same to me, I respect and admire them all the same. I have no favorites. If anything, I've been a James Toney fan for years.
Just because you obvioiusly have no concept of what it means to be unbiased, it doesn't mean that nobody can.
I AM UNBIASED WHEN IT COME TO TWO MEN IN THE RING.
I HAVEN'T HAD A "FAVORITE FIGHTER" FOR YEAAARS....AND COULD GIVE A SHIT WHO WINS ANY PARTICULAR MATCH.
I watch boxing because I enjoy the sport....not the sportsmen.
Got it?!
That article is the truth and I have to say this again, i'm done with this bullshit biased sport. DONE Somebody got paid that night. Two bullshit Judges !
I'm almost done with it. Once I let this fight go, I'll probably walk away from boxing for a while. I'll follow Corrales, Taylor, Mayweather, and Pacquiao, but that's it. This is just rotten.
Couldn't agree more. I ended up with two 10-10 rounds and one 9-9...and many of the rounds were extremely close; very hard fight to score. Neither man dominated, IMHO.
That proves it right there. You score even rounds, which is a cop-out for anybody who's fighter is being dominated. There are no even rounds without point deductions or knockdowns. Not in this day and age.
Easy work for Toney. The fight wasn't close at all, so don't try to save face by saying it was, K-Dogg. You made a bold prediction, but you were completely wrong on this one. Toney dominated that fight in terms of rounds. If you can find 5 rounds to give to Peter, then you are reaching really hard.
That's nonsense, come on now don't turn into another Kid now, I have no respect for that dumbass!
All I'm saying is there's more to professional boxing that landing snappy counters and covering up well.
Peter did not win the fight IMHO; but it was a lot closer than some are making it out to be....and the reason it was close was due to the impression both fighters made in the ring. In the end, Toney was the better man; but he did not "dominate" Peter.
Neither man, IMO, looked "great"; but Toney looked better than he did against Rahman, a fight which I feel he lost clearly.
I just think that Toney has created with his wins and his legacy a kind of aura like Ali had in the later stages of his second career where fans are hypnotized into just watching him and not the fight, if that makes any sense. If all you're (not you) watching is Toney, then you're missing half the action. Many fans of great fighters fall into this trap.
I've been a fan of Toney's since I first saw him on ESPN years ago when he faced and beat Merqui Sosa; but I have to make myself watch the fight if I'm going to score it because it is so easy to be an admirer of his work and miss the content of the entire fight.
K-Dogg you keep agreeing with Kid who makes no sense what so ever.
No, he does make sense. Number of punches landed isn't necessarily the main factor in who wins a professional prize fight. Achilles is correct when he says it's overall dominance. Toney did land more punches; but he also took periods of time off which allowed Peter to get off to good effect; and Peter's punches physically moved Toney back....which leaves an impression.
As I'd stated in my Amateur Boxing vs Professional Boxing post, too many people look at punch-stats, or rely on how clever a particular boxer looks.
I do think Toney won; but it wasn't a blow-out or a dominant performance by any means. That's what I agree with.
I make no sense to you because you're a fucking idiot. If I tried to teach my fucking dog American history he wouldn't know what I was saying would he? That's because he's a dipshit moron like you.
Flurries and combinatons don't win fights. Imposing your will on an opponent wins a fight. If you can knock the opponent back with a jab alone, and mix in the occassional right hand or left hook, you are doing well. You don't need to throw 4-5 punch combinations at a time to win a round if a jab or two has the same effect.
People on this site have a delusional view on what boxing is. It's not about looking smooth or nice in the end, it's about imposing your will on your opponent, it's about HURTING the opponent. The slick defense is there to prevent you from sustaining damage, but it doesn't win rounds. You need to land hard punches, maybe not knockout punches, but hard punches that force the opponent back and get their respecrt.
Peter was in that fight all the way. A lot of those rounds should have been scored 10-10 or 10-9 for Peter in the occasions where Toney took them off. To have Toney dominating is just as absurd as having Peter at 116-111. It wasn't a landslide fight for either guy.
The problem with scoring this fight was judges were afraid to pull out the old 10-10, one of the most sorely missed aspects of judging in boxing. If no man noticeably dominates a round, it's 10-10.
Couldn't agree more. I ended up with two 10-10 rounds and one 9-9...and many of the rounds were extremely close; very hard fight to score. Neither man dominated, IMHO.
From what I saw, it looked like Peter was stealing rounds by putting together combinations the last 15-30 seconds of each round. The scoring was absolutely rediculous. The fight was much closer than that and a draw would have been suffice. I honestly had Toney up by 1 or 2 points, but as I said a draw would have also been fair. This is a perfect example of why the sport of boxing is coming to a slow but sure demise. Maybe they'll start showing some more PRIDE fights over here.. *sigh*
Why don't you read the rest of my posts instead of focusing on the fat jokes. Maybe Peter haters rip on his condition yet it's all his supporters respond to. I make good points about why Toney did not come close to dominating Peter and everyone is silenced. No one wants to touch that with a ten foot pole. It's much easier to say "oh you're just shallow and looking at his waistline and not his skills". Oh, I noticed his skills, and they are all they're hyped up to be, but skills alone don't win a fight. Skills don't do the fighting for you. Maybe if Toney came to fight in better shape and had a higher punch output, he would have won that fight convincingly.