Rjj at smw - overrated?

I aint even read that, bro. Yeah because you don't have a response, that's why. I'm sick of arguing with you that beating a guy who's technically undefeated and rated top 3 P4P in the world by the most respected ****zine in the world isn't an accomplishment. You wanna make that argument? Make it to yourself. I never said it wasn't an accomplishment. If you actually read, I actually said it was an impressive accomplishment. The literal opposite of what you're implying I said. I said what Roy Jones did wasn't unique, because Toney was beaten easily, in his prime, both before and after Roy Jones did the same thing. Making your statement of; "Did you see what he did to the 44-0, top 3 in the world James Toney?" non sensical because Dave Tiberi did the exact same thing essentially. Thus, the entire point, that seems to be eluding you.​

I’m not arguing to argue I am directly responding to your incorrect statement. I’m not sure you understand what the terminology you use means. What you think is irrelevant. The vast majority of people would say his best weight was Middleweight. So your point makes no sense because he was beaten easily by an unranked journeyman at his best weight, thus the point. Never once said that. Oh really? You mean the literal EXACT excuse that he and all his moronic fans use for why he was dominated by Roy Jones? :lol1: You can't even be serious at this point. Also, for you to say that about the Tiberi fight is baseless. And, if his fight with Tiberi was an "off night" like you're trying to claim then why wasn't his fight with Roy Jones and off night? That's the 4th time of asking now. The official scorecards are irrelevant when it’s a clear as day robbery like Tiberi was. Nothing alike to either of those Holmes fights at all. Yes he beat McCallum after that, arguably lost that fight but yes he won. And? How does that change the fact he was beaten clearly by Tiberi? It doesn’t, hence why what Roy Jones did wasn’t unique which was the falsehood you were trying to push. ​ Toney is a HOF’er yes, second ballot, not first Ballot. Is there a point there, or? What you are saying is literally the opposite of reality :lol1: James Toney doesn't even have a single dominant win over a top fighter. He struggled and/or arguably lost to every single one he faced. Which the exact reason why he's not a great fighter, and not a First Ballot HOF'er. The fact of the matter is what Roy Jones was not unique. It’s really just as simple as that. James Toney was beaten easily MULTIPLE times in his prime both before and after he was beaten easily by Jones. That is just a fact. Any excuse you can use for why he lost those fights you can use for the Roy Jones fight.​ I aint even read that, bro. I'm sick of arguing with you that beating a guy who's technically undefeated and rated top 3 P4P in the world by the most respected magazine in the world isn't an accomplishment. You wanna make that argument? Make it to yourself.

Dude, you just seem to be arguing to be arguing. I’m not arguing to argue I am directly responding to your incorrect statement. I’m not sure you understand what the terminology you use means. I never said 160 was his best weight. I'd argue it was 168, as he won every fight, but the Jones one at that weight. What you think is irrelevant. The vast majority of people would say his best weight was Middleweight. So your point makes no sense because he was beaten easily by an unranked journeyman at his best weight, thus the point. And now you're pretending that weight classes don't matter? Never once said that. He was famous for gaining a lot of weight between fights. Maybe he cut it too close before the Tiberi fight. Oh really? You mean the literal EXACT excuse that he and all his moronic fans use for why he was dominated by Roy Jones? :lol1: You can't even be serious at this point. Also, for you to say that about the Tiberi fight is baseless. And, if his fight with Tiberi was an "off night" like you're trying to claim then why wasn't his fight with Roy Jones and off night? That's the 4th time of asking now. ​ He beat a MUCH BETTER fighter in Mike McCallum right after that. Is Mike McCallum ass because he lost to a fighter who almost lost to Dave Tiberi? And who cares if he admits he lost. That's not what the OFFICIAL scorecards say. You seem to only care what the official scorecards say when it fits YOUR point. He didn't lose even though most people think he did. Most people think Holmes lost to Williams, but because Holmes was DELUSIONAL enough to say he won, that makes it better? Just stop. The official scorecards are irrelevant when it’s a clear as day robbery like Tiberi was. Nothing alike to either of those Holmes fights at all. Yes he beat McCallum after that, arguably lost that fight but yes he won. And? How does that change the fact he was beaten clearly by Tiberi? It doesn’t, hence why what Roy Jones did wasn’t unique which was the falsehood you were trying to push. ​ ​ Toney's in the HOF for a reason & it's not because he had more off-nights than on nights. It's because he was a great fighter, most of the time, especially against TOP FIGHTERS. Even as a fat old guy at Cruiserweight & Heavyweight, he still showed up in the biggest fights against Holyfield & Jirov because those were fights that mattered. Toney is a HOF’er yes, second ballot, not first Ballot. Is there a point there, or? What you are saying is literally the opposite of reality :lol1: James Toney doesn't even have a single dominant win over a top fighter. He struggled and/or arguably lost to every single one he faced. Which the exact reason why he's not a great fighter, and not a First Ballot HOF'er. The fact of the matter is what Roy Jones was not unique. It’s really just as simple as that. James Toney was beaten easily MULTIPLE times in his prime both before and after he was beaten easily by Jones. That is just a fact. Any excuse you can use for why he lost those fights you can use for the Roy Jones fight.​

You are not seriously comparing Holmes-Witherspoon to Toney-Tiberi :lol1: That is just comical. Are you missing the part where Toney ADMITTED he lost to Tiberi? The government literally investigated that judges in that fight. Not even remotely comparable to either of those Larry Holmes fights. “I already showed you that against the best fighters, not named Jones, he shined, which is why he has victories over HOF fighters.“ Ok then so AGAIN, why was his fight with Roy Jones not an “off night” then like you’re claiming it was vs Tiberi and Thadzi? He also did not “shine” in a single one of those fights you mentioned. Not even one of them. Maybe in your fantasy world he “shined” but in reality he actually did the opposite and looked poor in all of them except McCallum 1 which he didn’t even win. He looked terrible against Nunn, he looked even worse against Johnson, and he looked poor in the McCallum rematch aswell. He arguably lost all of those fights you mentioned outside of Nunn which he was well behind on the cards in and was losing clearly. The sole and only difference between those fights and the Tiberi and Thadzi fights were he got the decisions on them. It’s the literal exact same fighter. “He also NEVER LOST at 168 to anyone other than Jones.” Ok….AND? Why is that even 1% relevant? He drew and lost with journeyman at Middleweight which is supposed to be his best weight. You brought up the straw man fallacy and are literally using one there multiple times. Also, if he never lost to anyone at 168 other than Jones then why wasn’t Jones an “off night?” He didn’t lose to anyone at Middleweight either other than Tiberi. So, why do you deem that an “off night” and not the Jones fight? ​ Dude, you just seem to be arguing to be arguing. I never said 160 was his best weight. I'd argue it was 168, as he won every fight, but the Jones one at that weight. And now you're pretending that weight classes don't matter? He was famous for gaining a lot of weight between fights. Maybe he cut it too close before the Tiberi fight. He beat a MUCH BETTER fighter in Mike McCallum right after that. Is Mike McCallum ass because he lost to a fighter who almost lost to Dave Tiberi? And who cares if he admits he lost. That's not what the OFFICIAL scorecards say. You seem to only care what the official scorecards say when it fits YOUR point. He didn't lose even though most people think he did. Most people think Holmes lost to Williams, but because Holmes was DELUSIONAL enough to say he won, that makes it better? Just stop. Toney's in the HOF for a reason & it's not because he had more off-nights than on nights. It's because he was a great fighter, most of the time, especially against TOP FIGHTERS. Even as a fat old guy at Cruiserweight & Heavyweight, he still showed up in the biggest fights against Holyfield & Jirov because those were fights that mattered.

And Holmes REALLY lost to Witherspoon & Williams, but officially they didn't. I already showed you that against the best fighters, not named Jones, he shined, which is why he has victories over HOF fighters. He also NEVER LOST at 168 to anyone other than Jones. You are not seriously comparing Holmes-Witherspoon to Toney-Tiberi :lol1: That is just comical. Are you missing the part where Toney ADMITTED he lost to Tiberi? The government literally investigated that judges in that fight. Not even remotely comparable to either of those Larry Holmes fights. “I already showed you that against the best fighters, not named Jones, he shined, which is why he has victories over HOF fighters.“ Ok then so AGAIN, why was his fight with Roy Jones not an “off night” then like you’re claiming it was vs Tiberi and Thadzi? He also did not “shine” in a single one of those fights you mentioned. Not even one of them. Maybe in your fantasy world he “shined” but in reality he actually did the opposite and looked poor in all of them except McCallum 1 which he didn’t even win. He looked terrible against Nunn, he looked even worse against Johnson, and he looked poor in the McCallum rematch aswell. He arguably lost all of those fights you mentioned outside of Nunn which he was well behind on the cards in and was losing clearly. The sole and only difference between those fights and the Tiberi and Thadzi fights were he got the decisions on them. It’s the literal exact same fighter. “He also NEVER LOST at 168 to anyone other than Jones.” Ok….AND? Why is that even 1% relevant? He drew and lost with journeyman at Middleweight which is supposed to be his best weight. You brought up the straw man fallacy and are literally using one there multiple times. Also, if he never lost to anyone at 168 other than Jones then why wasn’t Jones an “off night?” He didn’t lose to anyone at Middleweight either other than Tiberi. So, why do you deem that an “off night” and not the Jones fight? ​

Yeah..but...he did though. Or are you now going to argue that he didn't lose to Tiberi? You're aware that Toney has literally admitted he lost that fight, right? It is quite literally avenging it. Why did you avoid the question? Why isn't Toney's fight with Jones an "off night" like you're claiming it was with Tiberi and Thadzi? And Holmes REALLY lost to Witherspoon & Williams, but officially they didn't. I already showed you that against the best fighters, not named Jones, he shined, which is why he has victories over HOF fighters. He also NEVER LOST at 168 to anyone other than Jones.

Toney didn't lose to Dave Tiberi, so what's your point?:rolleyes: Yeah..but...he did though. Or are you now going to argue that he didn't lose to Tiberi? You're aware that Toney has literally admitted he lost that fight, right? And Oliver McCall having a literal nervous breakdown in the ring because Don King forced him out of rehab to fight against his will, isn't really avenging, is it?:rolleyes: It is quite literally avenging it. Why did you avoid the question? Why isn't Toney's fight with Jones an "off night" like you're claiming it was with Tiberi and Thadzi?

So say what happened then, that he won belts in 3 weight classes. You're again using a fallacy argument that the version of Toney who fought Tiberi and Thadzi is different to the versions who fought Nunn, McCallum and Johsnon and had an "off night" in those fights when it's not, it's the same. Why didn't he have an "off night" vs Jones if that's the case? That's the pathetic excuse that's normally used by his moronic fans to add to the other 100 or so. Well Larry Holmes didn't draw or lose to either of those so that comparison doesn't work. And Lewis avenged his loss's to those fighters unlike Toney so that comparison doesn't work either. I'll ask it again since you want to use this "off night" excuse. Why wasn't his fight with Jones an off night? Toney didn't lose to Dave Tiberi, so what's your point?:rolleyes: And Oliver McCall having a literal nervous breakdown in the ring because Don King forced him out of rehab to fight against his will, isn't really avenging, is it?:rolleyes:

I didn't say he won belts in every weight class I said he won belts between 160-190. So say what happened then, that he won belts in 3 weight classes. So, by your logic, beating somebody who beat P4P rated Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, & Reggie Johnson, who was a 2-division, unified champ isn't that impressive because he had some off-nights against some guys. You're again using a fallacy argument that the version of Toney who fought Tiberi and Thadzi is different to the versions who fought Nunn, McCallum and Johsnon and had an "off night" in those fights when it's not, it's the same. Why didn't he have an "off night" vs Jones if that's the case? That's the pathetic excuse that's normally used by his moronic fans to add to the other 100 or so. Cool, beating Larry Holmes not a big deal because he had some off nights against Carl Williams & Tim Witherspoon. Beating Lennox Lewis aint that big a deal because he lost to Hassim Rahman & Oliver McCall & journeyman Ray Mercer, who most people think beat him. Let's define everybody by their off-nights. :rolleyes: Well Larry Holmes didn't draw or lose to either of those so that comparison doesn't work. And Lewis avenged his loss's to those fighters unlike Toney so that comparison doesn't work either. I'll ask it again since you want to use this "off night" excuse. Why wasn't his fight with Jones an off night?

My point is and has been clear from the start; Beating a prime James Toney is not unique because unranked journeyman did it. Made that abundantly clear. Your counter (fallacy) argument to that is that “He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect.​“ Which is non sensical because those are the exact excuses given for why he was dominated by Roy Jones and arguably lost to every fighter you listed. So that’s those points covered. As for the rest; I never said Toney was “chopped liver”. That’s another fallacy argument you’ve attempted to make again. Toney was a good fighter (not great) and a HOF’er (not first ballot) and beating him deserves credit, sure. But unranked journeyman beat him in his prime, and easily by the way. So what Roy Jones did whilst impressive, is not as impressive as you are trying to make out. He didn’t win belts from 160-190 either, because he didn’t win a belt at 175. So that’s incorrect. You’ve again reverted to a fallacy argument, by claiming Tiberi and Thadzi and Williams and Sosa and all the other unranked fighters he either drew, lost, or struggled with were “off nights” when they weren’t. It’s all the same fighter, that’s his level. James Toney doesn’t hold a single dominant performance against a Top opponent, there is a reason for that and that’s also the same reason why he lost and struggled with unranked fighters multiple times in his prime. I didn't say he won belts in every weight class I said he won belts between 160-190. Roy Jones won belts between 160-200, even though he skipped Cruiser. So, by your logic, beating somebody who beat P4P rated Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, & Reggie Johnson, who was a 2-division, unified champ isn't that impressive because he had some off-nights against some guys. Cool, beating Larry Holmes not a big deal because he had some off nights against Carl Williams & Tim Witherspoon. Beating Lennox Lewis aint that big a deal because he lost to Hassim Rahman & Oliver McCall & journeyman Ray Mercer, who most people think beat him. Let's define everybody by their off-nights. :rolleyes:

So, what is your argument? That Dave Tiberi is better than Nunn, McCallum, & Johnson? Do you think Dave Tiberi would've beat any of them at that point? If Toney's such chopped liver how does he beat HOF fighters? Who cares if he was losing to Nunn? Joe Louis was losing to Billy Conn before knocking him out. Pernell Whittaker was losing to Diosbelys Hurtado before knocking him out. Again, this happens all of the time in boxing. The GREAT fighters often find a way to win when they arguably shouldn't. Fact is Toney is a HOF fighter, who beat HOF & highly ranked fighters from the time he was in his early 20s into his mid 30s. And won belts between 160-190, in spite of only being 5'9" You devalue Michael Nunn, Roy Jones, Reggie Johnson, Mike McCallum, Prince Charles Williams, and the champions he fought by acting like the only things that matter are his off-nights. My point is and has been clear from the start; Beating a prime James Toney is not unique because unranked journeyman did it. Made that abundantly clear. Your counter (fallacy) argument to that is that “He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect.​“ Which is non sensical because those are the exact excuses given for why he was dominated by Roy Jones and arguably lost to every fighter you listed. So that’s those points covered. As for the rest; I never said Toney was “chopped liver”. That’s another fallacy argument you’ve attempted to make again. Toney was a good fighter (not great) and a HOF’er (not first ballot) and beating him deserves credit, sure. But unranked journeyman beat him in his prime, and easily by the way. So what Roy Jones did whilst impressive, is not as impressive as you are trying to make out. He didn’t win belts from 160-190 either, because he didn’t win a belt at 175. So that’s incorrect. You’ve again reverted to a fallacy argument, by claiming Tiberi and Thadzi and Williams and Sosa and all the other unranked fighters he either drew, lost, or struggled with were “off nights” when they weren’t. It’s all the same fighter, that’s his level. James Toney doesn’t hold a single dominant performance against a Top opponent, there is a reason for that and that’s also the same reason why he lost and struggled with unranked fighters multiple times in his prime.

That’s not a strawman argument. A strawman argument would be narrowing down the fact Jones beating Toney at Super Middleweight makes any kind of difference between the one who lost to journeyman at Middleweight and Light Heavyweight when there is zero difference between them. So firstly every fight you just listed outside of Nunn; Mcallum x2 and Johnson he arguably lost. And then the Nunn fight he was losing wide before the KO. So, doesn’t really strengthen your argument in any way. The verison of Toney who fought them, is the exact same one who drew and lost to unranked journeyman, and also the exact same one who was totally dominated by Roy Jones. Thus the point. That’s it’s not a unique thing to do. You’re now again using a fallacy argument by saying “he fought to his level of opponent” and “He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect” when that is LITERALLY the exact opposite for the excuses given as to why he was dominated by Roy Jones. How do you reconcile that? It also makes no sense because again he arguably lost to all of those fighters you listed, outside of Nunn, a fight he was getting easily beaten in. So your argument doesn’t make sense, and isn’t based in any kind of reality. So, what is your argument? That Dave Tiberi is better than Nunn, McCallum, & Johnson? Do you think Dave Tiberi would've beat any of them at that point? If Toney's such chopped liver how does he beat HOF fighters? Who cares if he was losing to Nunn? Joe Louis was losing to Billy Conn before knocking him out. Pernell Whittaker was losing to Diosbelys Hurtado before knocking him out. Again, this happens all of the time in boxing. The GREAT fighters often find a way to win when they arguably shouldn't. Fact is Toney is a HOF fighter, who beat HOF & highly ranked fighters from the time he was in his early 20s into his mid 30s. And won belts between 160-190, in spite of only being 5'9" You devalue Michael Nunn, Roy Jones, Reggie Johnson, Mike McCallum, Prince Charles Williams, and the champions he fought by acting like the only things that matter are his off-nights.

Guy, you're making a strawman argument, here :lol1: I never said what was Toney's "best weight class" I said he was a P4P rated guy & technically undefeated at that point. Plenty of people think Larry Holmes lost to Carl "The Truth" Williams & Tim Witherspoon, that doesn't mean that when Spinks finally beat him officially that it was "no big deal" Toney beat Dave Tiberi officially, so when Jones beat him, he was a top 3 ranked fighter in the world. He beat Michael Nunn when Michael Nunn was P4P He drew with & beat HOF Mike McCallum when he was 42-1 & one of the most feared men in boxing. What are you saying, Nunn & McCallum & Reggie Johnson who was a good fighter that Toney beat, were chopped liver? Are you saying Dave Tiberi is better than them? Or, maybe, just maybe JT had a history of fighting up or down to his competition. He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect. That’s not a strawman argument. A strawman argument would be narrowing down the fact Jones beating Toney at Super Middleweight makes any kind of difference between the one who lost to journeyman at Middleweight and Light Heavyweight when there is zero difference between them. So firstly every fight you just listed outside of Nunn; Mcallum x2 and Johnson he arguably lost. And then the Nunn fight he was losing wide before the KO. So, doesn’t really strengthen your argument in any way. The verison of Toney who fought them, is the exact same one who drew and lost to unranked journeyman, and also the exact same one who was totally dominated by Roy Jones. Thus the point. That’s it’s not a unique thing to do. You’re now again using a fallacy argument by saying “he fought to his level of opponent” and “He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect” when that is LITERALLY the exact opposite for the excuses given as to why he was dominated by Roy Jones. How do you reconcile that? It also makes no sense because again he arguably lost to all of those fighters you listed, outside of Nunn, a fight he was getting easily beaten in. So your argument doesn’t make sense, and isn’t based in any kind of reality.

Ok. And? Isn’t Middleweight meant to be Toney’s best weight class according to his deluded fans? Isn’t the literal excuse that is given none stop for why Toney lost to Jones because he was weight drained at 168? What are you saying here? That Toney was only good at 168? That’s comical as again that is the literal excuse given to why he lost to Jones :lol1: That he was dead at the weight The fact of the matter is that unranked journeyman beat Toney in his prime. It’s just as simple as that. Guy, you're making a strawman argument, here :lol1: I never said what was Toney's "best weight class" I said he was a P4P rated guy & technically undefeated at that point. Plenty of people think Larry Holmes lost to Carl "The Truth" Williams & Tim Witherspoon, that doesn't mean that when Spinks finally beat him officially that it was "no big deal" Toney beat Dave Tiberi officially, so when Jones beat him, he was a top 3 ranked fighter in the world. He beat Michael Nunn when Michael Nunn was P4P He drew with & beat HOF Mike McCallum when he was 42-1 & one of the most feared men in boxing. What are you saying, Nunn & McCallum & Reggie Johnson who was a good fighter that Toney beat, were chopped liver? Are you saying Dave Tiberi is better than them? Or, maybe, just maybe JT had a history of fighting up or down to his competition. He came to fight in big fights & often would not train well for fights against guys he didn't respect.

Dave Tiberi fought Toney 2 years earlier in a totally different weight class :lol1: Toney only lost to Roy Jones at 168. His record at 168 was 10-1 Nobody beat him at 168 other than Jones. Those other fights were years before or after & in totally different weight classes :rolleyes: Ok. And? Isn’t Middleweight meant to be Toney’s best weight class according to his deluded fans? Isn’t the literal excuse that is given none stop for why Toney lost to Jones because he was weight drained at 168? What are you saying here? That Toney was only good at 168? That’s comical as again that is the literal excuse given to why he lost to Jones :lol1: That he was dead at the weight The fact of the matter is that unranked journeyman beat Toney in his prime. It’s just as simple as that.

Nah, not quite. Both of those fights you've just listed for Duran were fights where he was well beyond his prime and in his 3rd official weight class but 7 above where he started his career, by today's standard. James Toney drew, and was beaten easily by unranked journeyman, in his prime. So, nothing alike really. Again, if you use that excuse then why was he not down for the Roy Jones fight? It's either one of the other. Dave Tiberi beat the same version of Toney that Roy Jones did. Some argue that a better version since 160 is meant to be his best weight class. Beating Toney in his prime was an impressive win yes but not unique as previously stated, journeyman did it. Dave Tiberi fought Toney 2 years earlier in a totally different weight class :lol1: Toney only lost to Roy Jones at 168. His record at 168 was 10-1 Nobody beat him at 168 other than Jones. Those other fights were years before or after & in totally different weight classes :rolleyes:

Anytime you beat a p4p top #3 fighter in the world, it's a big deal. Roberto Duran had lulls in his career where he'd lose to Kirkland Laing & get obliterated by Hearns Then he'd beat a much bigger Moore & Barkley. Some guys are like that. Toney had an up & down career. There are legendary fighters who that has happened to. Nah, not quite. Both of those fights you've just listed for Duran were fights where he was well beyond his prime and in his 3rd official weight class but 7 above where he started his career, by today's standard. James Toney drew, and was beaten easily by unranked journeyman, in his prime. So, nothing alike really. Again, if you use that excuse then why was he not down for the Roy Jones fight? It's either one of the other. Dave Tiberi beat the same version of Toney that Roy Jones did. Some argue that a better version since 160 is meant to be his best weight class. Beating Toney in his prime was an impressive win yes but not unique as previously stated, journeyman did it.

That's a splendid list of excuses for why Toney drew and lost to unranked journeyman multiple times. Funnily enough the exact same ones they use for why he was totally dominated by Roy Jones. The same excuses you're using there, can, and always are, used to excuse the same thing you are praising Roy for. How do you reconcile that? What about getting easily beaten by Dave Tiberi just two years prior to losing to Jones? Why is what Roy did any more impressive than what Dave Tiberi did? And he didn't "go all the way up to Crusier" the fight before that either, that's just overtly disingenuous and an intentionally out of context proclamation. He fought Mike McCallum, a former Jr MW, at 180 lbs, the fight before that he fought Griffin. So let's not pile up the excuses and stick to the reality; He drew, and lost, to unranked journeyman, multiple times, in his prime years. Roy's win is impressive, but beating a prime Toney isn't unique, unranked journeyman did it. And any of the plethora of excuses you pull out your hat for as to why, the exact same thing can be done for Roy's win over him, so, yeah. Anytime you beat a p4p top #3 fighter in the world, it's a big deal. Roberto Duran had lulls in his career where he'd lose to Kirkland Laing & get obliterated by Hearns Then he'd beat a much bigger Moore & Barkley. Some guys are like that. Toney had an up & down career. There are legendary fighters who that has happened to.

he was no sven ottke

He was still undefeated & ranked top #3 in the world when he fought Roy. He was nowhere near that 3 years later when he fought Thadzi. The fight before that, he went all the way up to cruiser & and came back down to Thadzi. That was a down period in his career after losing to Jones & Montell Griffin He drew with Williams when he was a 1 1/2 into his career wayyyyyy back in 1990. That's a splendid list of excuses for why Toney drew and lost to unranked journeyman multiple times. Funnily enough the exact same ones they use for why he was totally dominated by Roy Jones. The same excuses you're using there, can, and always are, used to excuse the same thing you are praising Roy for. How do you reconcile that? What about getting easily beaten by Dave Tiberi just two years prior to losing to Jones? Why is what Roy did any more impressive than what Dave Tiberi did? And he didn't "go all the way up to Crusier" the fight before that either, that's just overtly disingenuous and an intentionally out of context proclamation. He fought Mike McCallum, a former Jr MW, at 180 lbs, the fight before that he fought Griffin. So let's not pile up the excuses and stick to the reality; He drew, and lost, to unranked journeyman, multiple times, in his prime years. Roy's win is impressive, but beating a prime Toney isn't unique, unranked journeyman did it. And any of the plethora of excuses you pull out your hat for as to why, the exact same thing can be done for Roy's win over him, so, yeah.