Best MW Champion since Marvin Hagler?

[QueensburyRules]

I would have to say GGG even though i am not a fan of his but with his iron chin and work rate he will be in any fight. We talk of Canelo being amazing but GGG has a argument for winning both fights against Canelo(he definitely won the first) Having said that any good fighter GGG Fought he made hard work of it .Danny Jacobs comes to mind and Danny doesn't even have a solid chin.

- - Danny fighting at a high level only KOed once in 40 fights.

Fan of both Canelo and GGG, but me scoring even rounds had Canelo by 1 rd first fight, so that's mighty close to the draw, and close to domination the 2nd. GGG ain't been right since.

[Noelanthony]

- - Danny fighting at a high level only KOed once in 40 fights.

Fan of both Canelo and GGG, but me scoring even rounds had Canelo by 1 rd first fight, so that's mighty close to the draw, and close to domination the 2nd. GGG ain't been right since.

I HAVE IT 1-1 but definitely Canelo the second fight took GGG spirit. He definitely isn't the same fighter he once was but age may play a factor

[DeeMoney]

He only showed skill anywhere near that level when facing past prime average fighters like Barkley.

He never showed that level of skill against any top level fighter and instead failed to beat a single top fighter in clear or dominant fashion.

Plenty of fighters looked great against Barkley.

Including Adolpho Washington who totally schooled him and stopped him in 6 rounds in the exact same year as Toney fought Barkely.

Does Washington get the same credit for such “skill”? He did the exact same thing.

My appreciation for Toney's work against Barkley was an appreciation of its aesthetic appeal, which I understand is subjective. Should Washington get as much credit for beating Barkley? Yes, of course. But I found his win to be more a matter of overwhelming Barkley, where I liked watching Toney's use of timing, judging distance more. Ironically, I tend to more often enjoy a fighter who overwhelms his opponent; but for this single instance I really appreciate what Barkley did.

Still, as I wrote, this is a matter of subjective opinion. I like the work of Manet more than other impressionists (and most other artists), does that make him objectively better? No. Same for the Toney vs Barkley fight.

[IronDanHamza]

My appreciation for Toney's work against Barkley was an appreciation of its aesthetic appeal, which I understand is subjective. Should Washington get as much credit for beating Barkley? Yes, of course. But I found his win to be more a matter of overwhelming Barkley, where I liked watching Toney's use of timing, judging distance more. Ironically, I tend to more often enjoy a fighter who overwhelms his opponent; but for this single instance I really appreciate what Barkley did.

Still, as I wrote, this is a matter of subjective opinion. I like the work of Manet more than other impressionists (and most other artists), does that make him objectively better? No. Same for the Toney vs Barkley fight.

I mean, you can enjoy whatever you want to enjoy.

Objectively, Barkely was past his prime, and simply average at his best.

Yeah Toney dominated him. What's the big deal?

[The Old LefHook]

I'll tell you this: Toney beat Mcallum pretty clearly in both fights. The fights were well fought on both sides, but not that close. Two halfwitted or crooked Las Vegas judges got it diametrically wrong.

Your personal hatred of Toney is showing through clearly, Dan Hammy, if you are trying to pass the Toney/Mcallum fights off as close affairs that could have gone either way. And don't start squalling to me about how the fight was close on the cards. Cards are often crooked.

[DeeMoney]

I mean, you can enjoy whatever you want to enjoy.

Objectively, Barkely was past his prime, and simply average at his best.

Yeah Toney dominated him. What's the big deal?

The big deal is that I enjoyed it, and I felt he did a great job at what he was trying to do stylistically. Thats what I wrote from the beginning, maybe you are confusing me with someone else who felt something different.

[IronDanHamza]

The big deal is that I enjoyed it, and I felt he did a great job at what he was trying to do stylistically. Thats what I wrote from the beginning, maybe you are confusing me with someone else who felt something different.

You said it's an example of "Pure greatness".

I'm questioning why dominating a past prime Iran Barkley would ever equate to "pure greatness".

There's nothing great about it. It's not some spectacular feat.

Adolpho Washington literally did the same thing a few months later.

[IronDanHamza]

I'll tell you this: Toney beat Mcallum pretty clearly in both fights. The fights were well fought on both sides, but not that close. Two halfwitted or crooked Las Vegas judges got it diametrically wrong.

Your personal hatred of Toney is showing through clearly, Dan Hammy, if you are trying to pass the Toney/Mcallum fights off as close affairs that could have gone either way. And don't start squalling to me about how the fight was close on the cards. Cards are often crooked.

McCallum 2 wasn't really that close on the cards so what you're saying there makes no sense. But it certainly WAS a close fight. You're trying to tell me it wasn't?

Both of the McCallum fights (that mattered) were obviously close, either way fights. I don't argue with either decision despite disagreeing with the second one.

[The Old LefHook]

Toney clearly won both fights in my eyes. No controversy is due. Mcallum put up great scraps but was in no danger of winning a decision in an honest world. Both men had incredible beards.

[IronDanHamza]

Toney clearly won both fights in my eyes. No controversy is due. Mcallum put up great scraps but was in no danger of winning a decision in an honest world. Both men had incredible beards.

Disagree. Both were close, either way fights.

What 7 rounds did Toney clearly win in either bout?

By the way, I don't believe there was controversy either. First fight was a draw (I scored it a draw aswell), second fight Toney won, I scored it for McCallum, but the result was fair. So there's no controversy here.

Fact of the matter is both fights were close. Nothing about either of those fights were "clear". Especially the second one where I'd say the majority of people would say McCallum deserved the victory.