Best MW Champion since Marvin Hagler?

[BattlingNelson]

Listing bigger names from previous years, or fighters they like or don't like from either generation.

I am not writing that one generation is better than another, just that an argument could be made as such. And that being the case, you could argue that not all top 10 wins are equal.

All top 10 wins are definetely not equal, but it's not possible to objectively decide that mr. 1980 is better than mr. 2010. What we can say though is that numbers matter. If there's more competition there is likely to be a better top. This means that the top 10 of 100 active middleweights is most likely better than the top 10 of 12 active middleweights. So if there's more active fighters is one era than another it objectively points towards that era being stronger than the other ok?

[QueensburyRules]

C'mon. Canelo started at 140. Chavez Jr. and Canelo started boxing as young kids, were not done growing and now they are men.

- - Canelo pro debut just after turning 15 stands 5-8. Jr 6-1 actually turned pro age 17 @130, a stick weight that he never matched from that point forward.

He was in the 140s age 19 when Canelo turned pro, and like James Toney, he ate himself out of every division he was in. Canelo more disciplined carefully worked his weight up through the divisions never blew up like Jr in between fights, but Jr a natural cruiser whereas Canelo been strength training to make LH that Jr struggles with using extreme dieting.

[DeeMoney]

All top 10 wins are definetely not equal, but it's not possible to objectively decide that mr. 1980 is better than mr. 2010. What we can say though is that numbers matter. If there's more competition there is likely to be a better top. This means that the top 10 of 100 active middleweights is most likely better than the top 10 of 12 active middleweights. So if there's more active fighters is one era than another it objectively points towards that era being stronger than the other ok?

I don't think that anyone would argue against that, as you implied, a greater talent pool in general leads to a stronger grouping at the top. That being written, there are some factors to consider in this instance which could dissuade us from simply using such a broad brush to evaluate; notably the popularity of boxing as a whole, overall population growth, and the end of the Cold War opening up more population groups to meet for an increased talent pool. Each of these would play a key role in determining how big the actual talent pool is.

Regardless, I do believe that the sample sizes are small enough (most fighters only have a hand full of title fights) that we can subjectively parse through and analyze each fighter's resume. Sure it would involve a little bias, but the spirited debate it creates is what this place is all about-as long as we can avoid being overly bias (especially for ancillary reasons), disingenuous, or just deflecting against viable arguments.

[ShoulderRoll]

James Toney lost to Dave Tiberi according to everyone on the planet except the 2 of the judges (who were investigated)

Not even sure why he’s even on the shortlist here.

So you would rank Golovkin above Toney, Dan?

[IronDanHamza]

So you would rank Golovkin above Toney, Dan?

At middleweight? Absolutely.

[Willie Pep 229]

James Toney is unrankable . . . take the aggregate of his career and he has to be dropped to the middle of the pack; too many bad nights . . . but on any given night . . . never bet on him, never bet against him, either way he just might screw you over.

[IronDanHamza]

James Toney is unrankable . . . take the aggregate of his career and he has to be dropped to the middle of the pack; too many bad nights . . . but on any given night . . . never bet on him, never bet against him, either way he just might screw you over.

Betting against him is a safer bet because even if he wins, he'll never win with ease or in dominant fashion (Against a top level fighter)

[The Old LefHook]

If anything will bring Dan Hammy out of the woodwork steaming, it is overvaluing Jim Toney.

[crold1]

James Toney is unrankable . . . take the aggregate of his career and he has to be dropped to the middle of the pack; too many bad nights . . . but on any given night . . . never bet on him, never bet against him, either way he just might screw you over.

Well said. I'm not sure GGG could have beaten Nunn or McCallum...but he damn sure wouldn't have lost to Dave Tiberi (or needed to be bailed out on the cards when he did). And therein lies the problem with Toney. His best wins were against such good fighters that he gets excused for atrocious stuff like that and Thadzi too easily.

[DeeMoney]

I'm not as big of a Toney fan as others, but I will write this: I've always felt his fight against Barkley was one of the few examples of pure greatness I have ever witnessed. Other's include Nas's 'New York State of Mind, and Greg Maddux's August '95 2-hit Maddux of the St Louis Cardinals, etc, etc.