Who ranks higher on the pound for pound all time greats Toney or Holyfield ?

[IronDanHamza]

Don't disagree with anything you say about Toney but . . .

"If anything . . ." ---> Na! I just can't go there, dispite the straps avaiable, we must impose a standard that respects the fight game's integrity.

Roy Jones was never HW Champion.

I don't mean the actual Champion, I just mean a belt holder.

Toney wasn't.

[JAB5239]

How do you make that calculation when Roy Jones was Champion at HW and Toney wasn't.

They both beat one ranked contender at the weight.

Jones beat Ruiz and Toney beat Holyfield who were 1-1-1 against each other.

How does that equate to a much better HW spell?

If anything Roy's was better because he was Champion.

Toney outclassed Ruiz, Rahman, went neck and neck with Peter the first fight and beat some other former top 10 heavyweights. In my opinion that makes him the more accomplished heavyweight. Roys paper WBA title means no more than it would if Toney kept the WBA title. Lewis was the only champion at that time. I also believe, but may be wrong that Holy was ranked higher when Toney beat him than Ruiz when Jones beat him. Either way Toney had a much better career at heavyweight in my opinion.

[IronDanHamza]

Toney outclassed Ruiz, Rahman, went neck and neck with Peter the first fight and beat some other former top 10 heavyweights. In my opinion that makes him the more accomplished heavyweight. Roys paper WBA title means no more than it would if Toney kept the WBA title. Lewis was the only champion at that time. I also believe, but may be wrong that Holy was ranked higher when Toney beat him than Ruiz when Jones beat him. Either way Toney had a much better career at heavyweight in my opinion.

Toney doesn't have a win over Ruiz so that's irrelevant.

He doesn't have a win over Rahman and he doesn't have a win over Peter so that's also irrelevant. So we're just naming fighters he didn't beat here.

Holyfield was Top 5 (Why I don't know) and Ruiz was Top 5. They both have 1 win over a Top 5 ranked opponents at the weight and just ranked opponents in general.

Roy Jones was a Title holder at Heavyweight, Toney wasn't.

There's no scenario where Toney had a "much better HW career" unless we include imaginary wins that he doesn't have.

[JAB5239]

Toney doesn't have a win over Ruiz so that's irrelevant.

He doesn't have a win over Rahman and he doesn't have a win over Peter so that's also irrelevant. So we're just naming fighters he didn't beat here.

Holyfield was Top 5 (Why I don't know) and Ruiz was Top 5. They both have 1 win over a Top 5 ranked opponents at the weight and just ranked opponents in general.

Roy Jones was a Title holder at Heavyweight, Toney wasn't.

There's no scenario where Toney had a "much better HW career" unless we include imaginary wins that he doesn't have.

He beat Ruiz easily, and would probably always do so even without the PED fail. That he fought and showed his competitiveness alone is more than Roy did outside of Ruiz. The paper title means nothing just as it wouldn't mean nothing if Toneys win over Ruiz stood. If we're counting heavyweight paper titles than I guess we have to count Toneys wins over Booker, Guinn and Oquendo giving more heavyweight titles and defenses than Roy......no?

Come on now Dan. We know how you feel about Toney, but he had a better and more complete heavyweight resume than Jones. I don't see how ANYONE against could argue that. Im not saying that makes him a bettet fighter or greater fighter overall.....but at heavyweight he certainly did more.

[IronDanHamza]

He beat Ruiz easily, and would probably always do so even without the PED fail.

You can keep repeating that he beat Ruiz but that's objecitvely false. He doesn't have a win over Ruiz.

You have no idea how he would do without a failed PED test nor does anyone.

It's irrelevant because he doesn't have a win over Ruiz which is again an objective fact of the matter.

That he fought and showed his competitiveness alone is more than Roy did outside of Ruiz. The paper title means nothing just as it wouldn't mean nothing if Toneys win over Ruiz stood.

I don't care about if's but's or maybe's. If my auntie was a man they'd be my uncle. It's irrelevant what it would mean IF it stood because it doesn't stand and he doesn't have a win over Ruiz. Fact.

If we're counting heavyweight paper titles than I guess we have to count Toneys wins over Booker, Guinn and Oquendo giving more heavyweight titles and defenses than Roy......no?

Er no actually because Roy Jones won the WBA Title which is one of the four belts of the 4 belt era. Toney didn't win any of those four belts so no we don't count those as Heavy titles or defenses.

Roy Jones actually won a world title at HW. James Toney didn't. So let's just stick to what actually happened here.

Come on now Dan. We know how you feel about Toney, but he had a better and more complete heavyweight resume than Jones. I don't see how ANYONE against could argue that. Im not saying that makes him a bettet fighter or greater fighter overall.....but at heavyweight he certainly did more.

I mean again you can repeat it again if you like but it's not in touch with any kind of reality.

Both of them beat 1 ranked fighter at HW.

One of them (Roy Jones) was a Title belt holder at HW.

This is factual information, it's not something that's up for debate. That to me looks dead even, not "much better" like you've made the claim of for Toney.

If you want to include imaginary wins and titles then yeah sure, it's Toney. I'm not in the business of including things that didn't happen and adding them to a resume. I'm more in the line of talking about things that actually happened.

[Sharpshootah]

Holyfield. Not even close

[JAB5239]

You can keep repeating that he beat Ruiz but that's objecitvely false. He doesn't have a win over Ruiz.

he doesnt have a loss to Ruiz either and it was plain to see who the superior fighter was.


You have no idea how he would do without a failed PED test nor does anyone.

I have a pretty good idea having seen both fighters plenty of times.

It's irrelevant because he doesn't have a win over Ruiz which is again an objective fact of the matter.

I don't need him to have the W to know who the better fighter was that night. Are you saying you think Ruiz was the better fighter that night?

I don't care about if's but's or maybe's. If my auntie was a man they'd be my uncle. It's irrelevant what it would mean IF it stood because it doesn't stand and he doesn't have a win over Ruiz. Fact.

Again, it doesn't matter. The fact he fought and showed he was a better fighter is enough.

Er no actually because Roy Jones won the WBA Title which is one of the four belts of the 4 belt era. Toney didn't win any of those four belts so no we don't count those as Heavy titles or defenses.

What four belts? An alphabet belt is an alphabet belt no matter what letters are in its name. None have anymore importance than the other unless it is owned by the one and only teue worlds heavyweight and lineal champion. Ruiz never held that distinction as previously noted my friend.

Roy Jones actually won a world title at HW. James Toney didn't. So let's just stick to what actually happened here.

No he didn't. Unless he beat Lennox Lewis he held an imaginary title. Ruiz wasn't even considered a top 5 heavyweight with his trinket.

I mean again you can repeat it again if you like but it's not in touch with any kind of reality.

Both of them beat 1 ranked fighter at HW.

One of them (Roy Jones) was a Title belt holder at HW.

A meaningless title for Jones just as it would have been for Toney had his fight with Ruiz not been declared a NC after he easily outfought him.

This is factual information, it's not something that's up for debate. That to me looks dead even, not "much better" like you've made the claim of for Toney.

So you disregard Toneys other wins and fights with top contenders at heavyweight?

If you want to include imaginary wins and titles then yeah sure, it's Toney. I'm not in the business of including things that didn't happen and adding them to a resume. I'm more in the line of talking about things that actually happened.

Paper titles are paper titles no matter how you try to twist it. And Toney factually beat more heavyweights than Jones, showing he could be competitive for more than 1 fight. That sir is a fact. It's not that I don't think Jones could have done it, it's the point Toney did and Roy didn't

[IronDanHamza]

he doesnt have a loss to Ruiz either and it was plain to see who the superior fighter was.

Right, and?

He doesn't have a loss to Mike Tyson either, he doesn't have a loss to Muhammad Ali either. What is the point you're making?

He doesn't have a win over John Ruiz. That is a fact. So you can't use Ruiz's name in Toney's win colum, because, he doesn't have a win over him.

I have a pretty good idea having seen both fighters plenty of times.

No, actually, you don't.

You can assume what would happen if they fought without taking PED's but that's all it would be, an assumption.

I can assume that Toney loses every round to Ruiz if he wasn't taking PED's. It's irrlevant. We don't know.

I don't need him to have the W to know who the better fighter was that night. Are you saying you think Ruiz was the better fighter that night?

Right and that is why there is a drug testing system applied in Boxing.

It is totally irrelevant who the better fighter was THAT NIGHT because Toney was under the influence of PED's thus he doesn't have a win over Ruiz.

Again, it doesn't matter. The fact he fought and showed he was a better fighter is enough.

What do you mean it doesn't matter? It LITERALLY entirely matters because the fight was overturned due to a failed drug test.

You are aware that the fight was overturned due to failed drug test or not?

He doesn't have a win over Ruiz, I can't make that any more easier to understand.

What four belts? An alphabet belt is an alphabet belt no matter what letters are in its name. None have anymore importance than the other unless it is owned by the one and only teue worlds heavyweight and lineal champion. Ruiz never held that distinction as previously noted my friend.

What do you mean what four belts? Are you playing ****** or what?

This is the four belt era - There are four legitimate world titles; WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO.

Roy Jones won one, James Toney didn't.

No he didn't. Unless he beat Lennox Lewis he held an imaginary title. Ruiz wasn't even considered a top 5 heavyweight with his trinket.

Ruiz was ranked #5 when Jones beat him and it for the WBA belt that he won off Evander Holyfield, which, is Toney's only win over a ranked contender at Heavyweight.

A meaningless title for Jones just as it would have been for Toney had his fight with Ruiz not been declared a NC after he easily outfought him.

Why are we talking about whether Toney's fight hadn't been declared an NC or not? IT WAS DECLARED AN NC.

What it would mean if it wasn't an NC is IRRELEVANT because it was.

So you disregard Toneys other wins and fights with top contenders at heavyweight?

What other wins with top contenders? He doesn't have any.

He beat 1 ranked fighter and that's Holyfield. He doesn't have any others.

Paper titles are paper titles no matter how you try to twist it. And Toney factually beat more heavyweights than Jones, showing he could be competitive for more than 1 fight. That sir is a fact. It's not that I don't think Jones could have done it, it's the point Toney did and Roy didn't

No they're really not. You're either playing ****** or I don't know what else.

We know that in the 4 belt era that there are 4 belts that are considered legimiate world titles and then there's the Lineal Title was is the champion.

Belts such as the IBO, WBU, IBA etc are not legitiamte world titles.

Roy Jones won one and James Toney didn't, that is a simple fact of the matter.

Toney did what? Had more fights at HW? Yeah ok sure. And? What's your point?

Jason Gavern has over double the amount of Heavyweight fights than Toney has.

How many more pointless stats can we throw out?

What's relevant is the fact the both have 1 win over ranked opponents at the weight. One was a title holder the other wasn't.

That's objectively speaking not "much better". Simple.

[JAB5239]

Right, and?

He doesn't have a loss to Mike Tyson either, he doesn't have a loss to Muhammad Ali either. What is the point you're making?

He doesn't have a win over John Ruiz. That is a fact. So you can't use Ruiz's name in Toney's win colum, because, he doesn't have a win over him.



No, actually, you don't.

You can assume what would happen if they fought without taking PED's but that's all it would be, an assumption.

I can assume that Toney loses every round to Ruiz if he wasn't taking PED's. It's irrlevant. We don't know.




Right and that is why there is a drug testing system applied in Boxing.

It is totally irrelevant who the better fighter was THAT NIGHT because Toney was under the influence of PED's thus he doesn't have a win over Ruiz.





What do you mean it doesn't matter? It LITERALLY entirely matters because the fight was overturned due to a failed drug test.

You are aware that the fight was overturned due to failed drug test or not?

He doesn't have a win over Ruiz, I can't make that any more easier to understand.




What do you mean what four belts? Are you playing ****** or what?

This is the four belt era - There are four legitimate world titles; WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO.

Roy Jones won one, James Toney didn't.




Ruiz was ranked #5 when Jones beat him and it for the WBA belt that he won off Evander Holyfield, which, is Toney's only win over a ranked contender at Heavyweight.




Why are we talking about whether Toney's fight hadn't been declared an NC or not? IT WAS DECLARED AN NC.

What it would mean if it wasn't an NC is IRRELEVANT because it was.




What other wins with top contenders? He doesn't have any.

He beat 1 ranked fighter and that's Holyfield. He doesn't have any others.





No they're really not. You're either playing ****** or I don't know what else.

We know that in the 4 belt era that there are 4 belts that are considered legimiate world titles and then there's the Lineal Title was is the champion.

Belts such as the IBO, WBU, IBA etc are not legitiamte world titles.

Roy Jones won one and James Toney didn't, that is a simple fact of the matter.

Toney did what? Had more fights at HW? Yeah ok sure. And? What's your point?

Jason Gavern has over double the amount of Heavyweight fights than Toney has.

How many more pointless stats can we throw out?

What's relevant is the fact the both have 1 win over ranked opponents at the weight. One was a title holder the other wasn't.

That's objectively speaking not "much better". Simple.

Jones had a fight declared a NC due to PED's, does that mean he still wasn't the better fighter? Yes, one win. And Toney with wins against other ABC titlists and a MD. Close fights with Peter and just a better overall resume at heavyweight. Please stop saying what is a legitimate belt and what isn't. None of them are. How many worlds do you live in? I live in one which means there can only be one world champion. We can go round and round till the cows come home. You're not going to change my opinion anymore than I am yours.

[IronDanHamza]

Jones had a fight declared a NC due to PED's, does that mean he still wasn't the better fighter? Yes, one win. And Toney with wins against other ABC titlists and a MD. Close fights with Peter and just a better overall resume at heavyweight. Please stop saying what is a legitimate belt and what isn't. None of them are. How many worlds do you live in? I live in one which means there can only be one world champion. We can go round and round till the cows come home. You're not going to change my opinion anymore than I am yours.

It means that fight that Jones has that was declared an NC isn't a win on his record his just like Toney doesn't have a win over Ruiz. You might be finally getting somewhere on that one.

A close loss to Peter doesn't go on his resume, nor does his draw with Rahman.

It is a legitimate belt in the 4 belt era. Roy Jones was never the champion, but he was a legitimate belt holder. Unlike Toney who wasn't. Very simple stuff.

Your opinion is irrelevant. The facts are what matters.

Which are; Toney's resume at HW is no better than Jones. Both have one win over a ranked opponent at Heavyweight and one of the two was a title holder.

Unless we start including imaginary wins like Ruiz, Peter and Rahman.

If we're heading into bizarro world where we're giving fighters credit for wins that don't exist then I'll just add a prime Ali, Louis, Liston and Foreman to Jones' heavyweight resume while we're at it.