Why So Much Praise For The "If Only" Fighters: (Toney, Judah, Khan, etc.)

PBP9y ago

If only James Toney was more disciplined, he would be one of the greatest fighters of all time. If Only Zab Judah wasn't a mental midget, he would have been an all time great fighter. If only Amir Khan can avoid the big punch for 12 rounds, he would have won. These types of sayings happen so much that people actually start to believe the bull****. Why is at that these fighters losses get written off as "mental lapses" rather than flaws in their game? Do people actually watch the fights or do they just repeat what they hear on an Ellie Sechback video? When you look at James Toney's fights, he excelled against fighters that came to him. His performances against Iran Barkley, Evander Holyfield, John Ruiz, Samuel Peter (yes he was robbed), Vassily Jirov were magical. But when he fought guys that showed a little movement, had an effective jab and made him lead, he wasn't so great. It took him 24 rounds and he still couldn't figure out Montell Griffin and often struggled with below average opposition. Zab Judah had a combination of power, handspeed and timing that made even the most knowledgeable boxing heads drink the Kool-aid at times. But he lost every big fight he was in. He looked the part at times and was the last undisputed welterweight champion which is a great accomplishment. But he wasn't a very smart fighter and it showed every time he stepped up in class. And Amir Khan is the funniest of the bunch. People fall in love with his handspeed but ignore how he backs up in straight lines and is as good as useless on the inside. But when he loses, it's always "if only his chin held up". There's not many fighters that would remain standing after a lot of those shots that KO'd Amir Khan. I'm not questioning the talent of these fighters. They are all world class fighters, became unified champions and had tremendous accomplishments. Respect to all of them. But can we stop pretending that their losses weren't due to anything other than being flawed fighters? And accept them for what they are.

Comments (20)

Sugar_Adam_Ali

Lmao... No, he wasn't robbed against Samuel Peter, Sam won both times fair and square. Toney won the first fight clearly and was robbed, 2nd fight was all Peter

9y ago

IronDanHamza

Irregardless of that fact, when he was beaten then, he was regarded as a great fighter at that particular place and time, thus, it's a quality win. Since when has being ranked #3 P4P = Great fighter? He was considered one of the best fighters in the world for a very short space of time. That does not equal being a great fighter. A quality win yes, in a fight he was being schooled in before pulling it back. Still not a great fighter.

9y ago

LoadedWraps

It's not all that matters. Just because he was ranked as one of the best in the world in 1991 doesn't make him a great fighter. Irregardless of that fact, when he was beaten then, he was regarded as a great fighter at that particular place and time, thus, it's a quality win.

9y ago

IronDanHamza

So if he made weight comfortably, what would he have done differently to make those "razor thin decisions" turn in his favor? Why didn't he make the weight properly the second time? Excuses, as usual.

9y ago

IronDanHamza

Don't quote me again you clown. I've heard it all now. Michael Nunn was far, far, far away from being a great fighter, and it's a fact? Ha! Yeah. I'll quote you whenever I feel like it mate. Micheal-Nunn-is-not-a-great-fighter. That is a fact. He's not even HOF calibur.

9y ago

IronDanHamza

What matters is where he was and how he was ranked at the time of the fight, you know better. Hindsight is 20/20 It's not all that matters. Just because he was ranked as one of the best in the world in 1991 doesn't make him a great fighter.

9y ago

LoadedWraps

Micheal Nunn isn't, wasn't and will never be a great fighter. Fact. Highly ranked in 1991, had a lot of potential, had a lot of hype, and never fulfilled it. What matters is where he was and how he was ranked at the time of the fight, you know better. Hindsight is 20/20

9y ago

robertzimmerman

So if he made weight comfortably, what would he have done differently to make those "razor thin decisions" turn in his favor? You've said earlier that he was sluggish against Roy due to him being drained. If he lost a razor thin decision to Griffin whilst not at 100%, logic states that he could have beaten him if he'd have been fully fit, fighting to his full capabilities. But I agree with you that Griffin would always have been a tough match up for him stylistically.

9y ago

PBP

I give Montell a ton of credit. I'm just saying that Toney battled the scales and only lost razor thin decisions. So if he made weight comfortably, what would he have done differently to make those "razor thin decisions" turn in his favor?

9y ago

RightJabLikeZab

Pretty dumb including Toney with guys like Zab and Khan. Very dumb actually. Also, not sure how guys in here are trying their hardest to discredit and pick apart Toney's resume but don't do the same thing with Hopkins.

9y ago

robertzimmerman

That's the problem though. You are giving Griffin no credit and automatically assume that if Toney "didn't have to drain himself" he would have lived up to his potential and dominated. That is pure speculation and when you watch the fights play out, it becomes clear that no version of Toney would have wiped the floor with Griffin. How would weight have changed the outcome? He was doing well in the later rounds. Yes the fights were razor close. I actually scored the 2nd one for Toney myself if I recall. But neither guy proved to be superior over the other. I give Montell a ton of credit. I'm just saying that Toney battled the scales and only lost razor thin decisions.

9y ago

New_England

That's the problem though. You are giving Griffin no credit and automatically assume that if Toney "didn't have to drain himself" he would have lived up to his potential and dominated. That is pure speculation and when you watch the fights play out, it becomes clear that no version of Toney would have wiped the floor with Griffin. How would weight have changed the outcome? He was doing well in the later rounds. Yes the fights were razor close. I actually scored the 2nd one for Toney myself if I recall. But neither guy proved to be superior over the other. yet you think montell griffin was a "flat out better" fighter? how does that make any sense? and we shouldn't consider that toney did a heck of a lot more than griffin, like become the best fighter on the planet at 160, and then at 200 lbs 10 + years later? considering that toney did that, and griffin did not, when considering who is the "flat out better fighter," isn't appropraite?

9y ago

PBP

Griffin was a tough match up stylistically, but a lot of people think Toney won and it's well known that he had weight troubles before both fights. That was Toney's downfall. Even though he moved up to LHW, he still had to drain himself. How could he have been a flat out better fighter when they were razor close decisions and Toney had trouble with the scales? That's the problem though. You are giving Griffin no credit and automatically assume that if Toney "didn't have to drain himself" he would have lived up to his potential and dominated. That is pure speculation and when you watch the fights play out, it becomes clear that no version of Toney would have wiped the floor with Griffin. How would weight have changed the outcome? He was doing well in the later rounds. Yes the fights were razor close. I actually scored the 2nd one for Toney myself if I recall. But neither guy proved to be superior over the other.

9y ago

robertzimmerman

how is a guy who was the top ranked MW, SMW, and CW on the planet, and who contended all the way to HW, an "if only" fighter? because he was that talented? i really don't understand the argument. james toney is an underachiever only if you think he has ungodly talent. the guy accomplished a lot. sam peter weighed 250 lbs, ffs. he's two inches taller than floyd mayweather and has roughly the same reach. no, i'm not implying that he was naturally the same size floyd, but that doesn't mean he was a natural HW or cruiserweight, either. fight of the year against the top ranked CW in the world at the time. alphabet titles at MW, SMW, and CW. maybe an alphabet title at HW, but i'd have to look at the timeline and the drug tests :lol1: these are accomplishments that stand out and separate you from the the amir khan's and zab judah's of the world. and yes, james toney is a cinch for the hall of fame. Great post.

9y ago

robertzimmerman

I didn't say he shouldn't get credit. I just meant I can see why people may use Toney's "out of shape" excuse for that particular fight. As opposed to Montell Griffin who IMO, was just a flat out better fighter and proved it over the course of 24 rounds. How could he have been a flat out better fighter when they were razor close decisions and Toney had trouble with the scales?

9y ago

robertzimmerman

Yes, fact. He's not even a HOF caliber fighter, fact. Therefore he's far far FAR from being a great fighter. FACT. Don't quote me again you clown. I've heard it all now. Michael Nunn was far, far, far away from being a great fighter, and it's a fact? Ha! Yeah.

9y ago

robertzimmerman

I only buy the motivation factor for losses like Thadzi. Griffin was an awkward fighter with underrated skills and I just don't think Toney could figure him out. I just can't buy these excuses. Against Roy Jones, he had to drain himself to make weight and was sluggish. OK, he moves up in weight, so he doesn't have to drain himself, and loses to Montell Griffin. Griffin beats him in a close fight. He was under prepared and took Griffin lightly He gets a 2nd shot at Griffin, after being in the ring with him for 12 rounds, knowing his tendencies and motivated to avenge a prior loss. And still couldn't get it done. Why can't we just admit that Griffin was either the better or just had Toney's number? Why do we have to use the "if only excuse" That's where I'm getting at. Griffin was a tough match up stylistically, but a lot of people think Toney won and it's well known that he had weight troubles before both fights. That was Toney's downfall. Even though he moved up to LHW, he still had to drain himself.

9y ago

5310

james toney is jewish http://cdn1.bloguin.com/queensberryrules/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2013/11/James-Toney-vs-Charles-Williams.jpg http://s646.photobucket.com/user/philosophiser/media/Zab-Judah-Miguel-Cotto30.jpg.html

9y ago

New_England

9y ago

IronDanHamza

He's not the more accomplished fighter but in terms of head to head skill, he proved he is at least of the same caliber. He was giving prime Roy Jones hell for 7 or 8 rounds. Performed much better than Toney or even Hopkins. He gets flack for the rematch but he just ran into a pissed off killer that had it in his mind that he would end it in 1 round that night. Yeah his chin just isn't good unfortunately. He dominated Daraiusz for 4 rounds before getting stopped. Early stoppage but he was on his way anyway. That and Roy 2 were his only legit loss's of his prime/close to prime years.

9y ago