James Toney says Oleksander Usyk is NOT an ATG

This is a prime example of what some people like to call "hating".

If you consider the comp in different era's, the only way to say any fighter over the last decade or so is an ATG is via eye test. Floyd and Pac both obviously are there based on what they did in their early careers. Apart from them, for me at least, Bud is the one guy who I believe could have fought in any era and beat the best of that era. And that is purely eye test and I said it before he even beat Spence. He has intangibles that 99% of fighters don't have. Usyk is a very good fighter but not an ATG IMO. Fury was past his best and AJ is a good puncher, not a great boxer. Terrence Crawford could not fight in any era, there is completely no evidence for this 'Terrence Crawford for the large majority of his career, has been a modern day fighter who has extensively weighted drained himself to be the big man on fight night, and has avoided fighting at his more natural weight until very recently'. During the boxing era's pre-1980, none of the top level fighters 'or fighters in general were weight draining themselves, due to the rules of boxing which were being used back then. It quite simply was not wise, to attempt using such backwards training methodologies. When fighters were being weighed in on the same day they fought'. Terrence Crawford is an all-time great fighter, and one of the greatest fighters of his era 'but really? We can only compare him to fighters who have fought in the boxing eras post - 1980. Fighters who have competed under the day before weigh in rules'. And even when we do compared Crawford to other modern day all-time great fighters like Floyd Mayweather Junior, Roy Jones Junior, Bernard Hopkins, Manny Pacquiao. It becomes very clear that his resume is overrated, the only statistic which is keeping him close to those fighters? Is that he is a undefeated fighter'. Note: Terrence Crawford skill for skill is a very gifted fighter, but let's be honest? On an individual fight basis, Canelo Alvarez still has a by far better resume than Crawford. It is an absolute fact that Alvarez has beaten a higher number of greater fighters'. Terrence Crawford's best wins are a version of Canelo Alvarez not only outside of his peak, but also dead at the weight of 168 pounds 'If Canelo Alvarez was to fight again; I would not be surprised if he moved back up into the 175 pound divisions'. Crawford's next best wins are, a traumatized Kell Brook, Semi-retired Shawn Porter, and demotivated Amir Khan 'that is it really, those are his greatest wins'. They are still all very solid wins, and it was impressive how he beat those fighters 'but compare those wins, to some of the greatest performances the fighters I have just mentioned up above have on their resumes'. Oleksandr Uysk has displayed more evidence, that he is an all-time great fighter than Terrence Crawford 'moving up from the Cruiserweight divisions into the Heavyweight Divisions is scientifically, and in terms of pure physics. The biggest and most formidable challenge any fighter can pursue in the sport'. Oleksandr Uysk became only the third fighter in history, to successfully move up into the Heavyweight Divisions and first? Become and World Champion, and then Undisputed Champion. In the process he beat the two premier Super Heavyweight Champions of this era, which were Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua twice back to back'. Those wins vs. Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua are pound for pound the greatest individual wins in boxing of the past 15 years 'Uysk has achieved better wins on his resume that Terrence Crawford'. To conclude: There is a recent notion in boxing, mainly coming from American based boxing fans 'that Terrence Crawford is some sort of old school fighter. And that he could fight in any era, and be the best'. The reality is? Sugar Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong, Rocky Graziano 'none of those fighters were weight draining themselves before a fight, then gaining 15 to 20 pounds of weight after their weigh ins. It was not a part of boxing culture back during those eras'. But it has been a very predominant part of Terrence Crawford's career, and the modern day boxing era he has competed in 'throughout his entire career, he has been taking off between 10 to 20 + pounds before every single top level fight he has ever competed in. The video footage and documentaries are all out there for people to access and witness the backwards modern day training methodologies certain fighters use to gain acute competitive advantage'. Terrence Crawford has acknowledged that throughout his career, he has in-between fights be walking around at a solid 180 + pounds 'In my opinion, the evidence is overwhelming that he has went through his entire career, avoiding fighting a his more natural weight until very recently vs. Canelo Alvarez'. I am making the point, that any modern day fighter 'who approaches the sport of boxing in this manner. Those fighters are not old school fighters, and they have shown no evidence that they could complete in any boxing era throughout history and dominate'. If Terrence Crawford was to fight in boxing era's pre-1980, he would have to pick one weight division to compete in 'and that division is most likely going to be the 160 pound Middle weight divisions. He would I imagine, be a solid fighter. But there is no real evidence that he would dominate'. In comparison Floyd Mayweather Junior, Bernard Hopkins, Carl Froch 'those are some of the modern fighters, who have not extensively weight drained themselves throughout their careers. And they have approached the sport with a more old school traditional attitude, both in training and preparation'. In my opinion, only those types of modern day fighters have shown the evidence that they could compete in any boxing era 'Terrence Crawford is not one of those fighters' etc.

Well, he's not campaigned at heavyweight all his life. So you can theoretically favour others who been in division longer. But he's did ok so far - - Usyk been a Hvy Gold Medalist turning pro in the 199lb division of day before weighins where he was reliably 210+lbs in the ring. Undefeated with ABC Title Belts out the kazoo. Punch drunk Field is 26-10-2 in the 200 division and generally regarded as being better than punchdrunk Two Ton Toney, so Usyk is infinitely better than both combined.

If Usyk isn't an ATG, then neither is Toney.

george foreman defeated 4 champions. jack johnson defeated 5 champions (3 grossly undersized and 1 after 6 year retirement). people still consider them all time greats. it's subjective. without explaining one's criteria, opinion is irrelevant. these are my criteria. divisional atg is top15 ever in that division. atg p4p is top 135 p4p ever. why 135? 1 for every year of the gloved era. in 1910 there were not 100 atgs. ditto in 1930. and if we don't want to remove already recognized atgs from that recognition, we need more places as the years go by. anybody who didn't research boxing history from 1890s until now, shouldn't even bother to name/list atgs.

Well, he's not campaigned at heavyweight all his life. So you can theoretically favour others who been in division longer. But he's did ok so far

Toney took far too many blows to the head. Olympic Champion. Undisputed Cruiserweight Champion. Undisputed Heavyweight Champion. Defeated 7 World Champions in their home country. Sounds like an ATG to me. Usyk's record in world title fights at 200lbs and over is 13 - 0 - 0. All his world title fights have been on the road. 5 of his title wins were over undefeated opponents. He beat 3 reigning, undefeated world champions in their own back yards. He's been undisputed champion in 2 divisions and 2x undisputed HW champ. If that's not an ATG record, I don't know what is.

Toney took far too many blows to the head. Olympic Champion. Undisputed Cruiserweight Champion. Undisputed Heavyweight Champion. Defeated 7 World Champions in their home country. Sounds like an ATG to me. Usyk's record in world title fights at 200lbs and over is 13 - 0 - 0. All his world title fights have been on the road. 5 of his title wins were over undefeated opponents. He beat 3 reigning, undefeated world champions in their own back yards. If that's not an ATG record, I don't know what is.

Toney took far too many blows to the head. Olympic Champion. Undisputed Cruiserweight Champion. Undisputed Heavyweight Champion. Defeated 7 World Champions in their home country. Sounds like an ATG to me.

The thing with the ''he's not beat an ATG'' argument is it always ends in moving goal posts. Suddenly its well they never beat a prime ATG or they are on the lower end of some subjective list Joe Bloggs created. Briedis is easily a top 5 CW. That's an ATG surely? like I was saying above they will move goal posts and say oh nobody cares about CW. Gassiev is a top CW also. AJ & Fury are probably top 12-15ish HWs? where is the cut off line? Can a fighter not be an ATG without having beat one? Can you not become an ATG by say beating or dominating a load of otherwise excellent fighters? There are actually quite a few ATGs who never beat an ATG or arguably never. What ATG did Chavez Sr beat? Finito Lopez? He's obviously an ATG. When people talk about cruiserweight and heavyweight history Usyk will be mentioned, he's therefore an ATG. Americans, and American fighters specifically, seem to have a lot of resistance to giving non-Americans credit. Especially when the fighters in question behave like normal people outside the ring.

Usyk is an easy UD for fat Toney.

If you consider the comp in different era's, the only way to say any fighter over the last decade or so is an ATG is via eye test. Floyd and Pac both obviously are there based on what they did in their early careers. Apart from them, for me at least, Bud is the one guy who I believe could have fought in any era and beat the best of that era. And that is purely eye test and I said it before he even beat Spence. He has intangibles that 99% of fighters don't have. Usyk is a very good fighter but not an ATG IMO. Fury was past his best and AJ is a good puncher, not a great boxer. inoue could have competed and beat the best in any era as well, he is the best fighter to ever come out of japan.

Usyk>Fury>Klitschko is a quarter century of HWs domination and Usyk has the end say on that, that is a significant chunk of time in total modern boxing history years.

The thing with the ''he's not beat an ATG'' argument is it always ends in moving goal posts. Suddenly its well they never beat a prime ATG or they are on the lower end of some subjective list Joe Bloggs created. Briedis is easily a top 5 CW. That's an ATG surely? like I was saying above they will move goal posts and say oh nobody cares about CW. Gassiev is a top CW also. AJ & Fury are probably top 12-15ish HWs? where is the cut off line? Can a fighter not be an ATG without having beat one? Can you not become an ATG by say beating or dominating a load of otherwise excellent fighters? There are actually quite a few ATGs who never beat an ATG or arguably never. What ATG did Chavez Sr beat? Finito Lopez?

If you consider the comp in different era's, the only way to say any fighter over the last decade or so is an ATG is via eye test. Floyd and Pac both obviously are there based on what they did in their early careers. Apart from them, for me at least, Bud is the one guy who I believe could have fought in any era and beat the best of that era. And that is purely eye test and I said it before he even beat Spence. He has intangibles that 99% of fighters don't have. Usyk is a very good fighter but not an ATG IMO. Fury was past his best and AJ is a good puncher, not a great boxer. i wholeheartedly agree with this assessment and how i arrived at my conclusion. i actually like usyk to be honest BUT he only got 24 fights. he did MOST of his work in the AMATEURS. agreed as well on mayweather and pacquiao also again, agreed on Bud.

James Toney is an edgelord.

If we're going say that Usyk isn't an all time great because his resume isn't that great compared to fighters from 70's and 80's. Then you have to tell me why he doesn't past the eye test? Every argument I hear about Usyk not belonging up there with the Ali's, Fraziers, and Joe Louis is because he beat AJ, Fury, and Dubois. So he beat the Champions of his time period. How is that argument against Usyk not being an all time great? This is the era that he fought in. Listen, I'm not saying that he is an all time great but I wish people would actually make arguments with substance. You actually have to talk about his ring generalship, foot movement, IQ, and power then compare/contrast to the former greats.

If you consider the comp in different era's, the only way to say any fighter over the last decade or so is an ATG is via eye test. Floyd and Pac both obviously are there based on what they did in their early careers. Apart from them, for me at least, Bud is the one guy who I believe could have fought in any era and beat the best of that era. And that is purely eye test and I said it before he even beat Spence. He has intangibles that 99% of fighters don't have. Usyk is a very good fighter but not an ATG IMO. Fury was past his best and AJ is a good puncher, not a great boxer.