James Toney; Most overrated fighter of the 90's?

[robertzimmerman]

My man, can you read? Or are you purposely choosing to ignore what I've said?

My very first response in regards to Nunn said it was a "great win" yes it was a great WIN.

But the performance was not great, Toney looked poor in that fight. Out of shape maybe? I don't know. Probably. He pulled out the KO and again, great win. Not s great performance.

Yes it's my opinion that the first was a draw and tha second McCallum won. But it's not an opinion I'm alone in. Both were very close fights.

Montel Griffin, once again, READ my posts. I have CLEARLY stated in very clear and simple English that both fights were very close. Far from robberies. I had Griffin winning the first and Toney winning the second but again, both very close. Are you following?

I don't use that as "evidence" at all I'm merely using them as yet another example of Toney failing to clearly beat an opponent. Which is a reoccurring theme in his career.

I think Froch and Kessler would fair badly but what's that supposed to prove? That they are less skilled than Toney? No ****, Sherlock. Toney has a skill set and style that has a better chance of transitioning through the weights as opposed to a Carl Froch or a Mikkel Kessler.

You started out by saying it was a great win, before labelling it just as a good win.

Regarding the Griffin defeats, if they were so close and you rate Griffin, why is it such a travesty that Toney officially lost to him?

You are holding these defeats to the likes of Griffin as evidence as to why you don't think he's an ATG. And then when people note that he had issues with weight etc, you then become flippant and sarcastic.

No **** Sherlock? Well give him some ****ing credit then, instead of just focusing on how poor you think the HW's were who he fought.

[robertzimmerman]

What success? Losing, drawing and scraping decisions his whole career at every level the fought at?

You act like he has a great resume, he doesn't. Blame that on him being "out of shape" all you want, but he didn't manage to accumulate a "great resume" whilst being so.

No Nunn wasn't a "great fighter" IMO. Definitely not an ATG anyway. I don't think he's even in the HOF actually come to think of it.

You are an absolute JOKE!

And you honestly think you're objective? Dear me.

What success? Are you for real??

So he didn't have success?

He hasn't got a great resume?

Ha!

Nunn, Sosa, Johnson, McCallum, Thornton, Barkley, Williams, Littles, Jirov and Holyfield etc.

Extremely close fights with Griffin, Peter and Rahman, that could easily have been wins?

And now Nunn wasn't a great fighter?

Clueless!

[IronDanHamza]

You started out by saying it was a great win, before labelling it just as a good win.

Regarding the Griffin defeats, if they were so close and you rate Griffin, why is it such a travesty that Toney officially lost to him?

You are holding these defeats to the likes of Griffin as evidence as to why you don't think he's an ATG. And then when people note that he had issues with weight etc, you then become flippant and sarcastic.

No **** Sherlock? Well give him some ****ing credit then, instead of just focusing on how poor you think the HW's were who he fought.

Great win, good win. Tomato, tomato. It's a good win, very good win, great win. Whatever, semantics.

At what point do I label the Griffin loss's a "travesty" or even a bad thing at all? Merely breaking down the fights and highlighting that he once again failed to dominante or clearly beat an opponent.

Credit for what? Going up to Heavyweight and losing some of the contenders. Ok, well done James.

At no point did I hold any of his loss's as "evidence" why he's not an ATG you are once again putting words in my mouth and filling in your own blanks.

James Toney is not an ATG IMO because firstly his resume is no where near strong enough, secondly because he has zero impressive performances against top calibur opponents and thirdly because of a string of loss's/poor performances against sub par opposition.

You and many other Toney fans seem to blame all of that on him being "out of shape". While I agree Toney seemed to apparently never be in shape, #1 that's not an excuse and #2 I don't buy everytime he lost/looked terrible it was down to that anyway.

Toney is just not as good as you think he is IMO.

[robertzimmerman]

He was in shape for Nunn? Strange. I thought he was out of shape or does the KO equate to him being in shape?

So he was in shape twice in his career, looked poor the in the first one then got a draw in the second one. Fantastic. All time great stuff there.

Interesting, you say he came unstuck against Williams? Which Williams? Sanderline? I thought he won that one.

HE WAS IN SHAPE IN THE EARLY PART OF HIS CAREER.

HE WAS IN SHAPE FOR THE McCALLUM AND NUNN FIGHTS, BUT THEY WERE HARD FOUGHT WINS, BECAUSE THEY WERE ELITE FIGHTERS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

Where have I said he was only in shape for two fights?

What I'm saying is, he wasn't in shape after his SMW days, which Miller, Kallen, Roach, and Toney himself will all testify too.

He was unprofessional and he didn't dedicate himself like he should have done.

[IronDanHamza]

You are an absolute JOKE!

And you honestly think you're objective? Dear me.

What success? Are you for real??

So he didn't have success?

He hasn't got a great resume?

Ha!

Nunn, Sosa, Johnson, McCallum, Thornton, Barkley, Williams, Littles, Jirov and Holyfield etc.

Extremely close fights with Griffin, Peter and Rahman, that could easily have been wins?

And now Nunn wasn't a great fighter?

Clueless!

No he doesn't have a great resume. Not IMO.

What you just listed is not a great resume. And that's pretending that he won those fights clearly and in dominant fashion when in actual fact he won barely any of them clearly let alone in dominant fashion.

Once again you don't consider it objective because you seem to be struggling with me being truthful. You can't dispute that I've been very fair in my breakdown of Toney's career. Every single fight I have been fair.

No I don't think Nunn is great. Do you consider Nunn an ATG?

Great potential maybe. But that's pushing it to be honest. I may be mistaken but is he even in the HOF? I don't think he is.

[robertzimmerman]

Tell me how I have not been objective.

The OP shows a clear breakdown of is career from 88-03 and every fight I've broken down fairly. Which one is unfair?

Williams draw I said Toney won.

Sosa SD I said Toney won.

Griffin 2 I said Toney won.

Even the fights I think he lost and drew; Johnson, Griffin 1, McCallum 1 & 2 I have clearly stated were very close that Toney could easily have been awarded with the W.

Tiberi and Thadzi loss's being the only clear ones aside from Roy Jones.

How is that not fair or objective?

You don't consider it "objective" because you clearly don't like hearing the truth.

How is not fair and objective?

You've just told me he didn't have any success, he hasn't got a great resume, and Nunn wasn't a great fighter.

If you truly believe that, then you can't think very much of today's best fighters.

[IronDanHamza]

HE WAS IN SHAPE IN THE EARLY PART OF HIS CAREER.

HE WAS IN SHAPE FOR THE McCALLUM AND NUNN FIGHTS, BUT THEY WERE HARD FOUGHT WINS, BECAUSE THEY WERE ELITE FIGHTERS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

Where have I said he was only in shape for two fights?

What I'm saying is, he wasn't in shape after his SMW days, which Miller, Kallen, Roach, and Toney himself will all testify too.

He was unprofessional and he didn't dedicate himself like he should have done.

So he was in shape at Middleweight?

I couldn't care less if he was in shape or not to be honest I don't know how to make that any more clear.

[IronDanHamza]

How is not fair and objective?

You've just told me he didn't have any success, he hasn't got a great resume, and Nunn wasn't a great fighter.

If you truly believe that, then you can't think very much of today's best fighters.

I didn't say he didn't have any success. Are you going to put words in my mouth every post.

I asked you to tell me about his success. It's overstated on your part.

The fact you think if you say James Toney doesn't have a great resume is failing to be objective is as laughable as it is baffling. As if that's not even up for debate. Well yes it clearly is VERY debatable if Toney has a great resume. VERY debatable.

I will ask you again, do you think Nunn is an ATG? I don't. So no I don't think he's a "great fighter" at all.

[robertzimmerman]

I put a question mark at the end of my question to discuss who else is overrated in the 90's like James Toney but no one seems to want to discuss that the topic has no moved toward whether Toney is an ATG or not. Which I'm more than happy to debate.

The reason I pose this question is because on this forum and forum's alike I see Toney rated extremely highly and that's something I'm dis*****g.

The points of debate you bring up are poor points, frankly.

Mate, how many times, I don't need to do research to know Toney was out of shape his entire career. I am fully aware of this. Not only is this not ATG material it's also been the reasoning used to defend Toney's poor performances for the last 20 odd years. I do not care less about it. It's an excuse, whether it's true or not. I have never disputed that Toney was always out of shape.

David Haye struggled with Valuev? What fight did you watch? I had Haye winning all but one round. Or did you just see it was an MD and assume he struggled?

Er, where did I say Peter and Rahman are poor? Quote me. I have not said that in this thread.

I clearly stated that Toney's abundance of skill is what allowed him to be successful at HW. No where have I disputed the skills of James Toney. I have highlighted that skill level in this thread many times but it's become abundantly clear that you either struggle with reading or refuse to take in what you read. Perhaps you just read it but purposely don't take it in who knows but clearly you are failing somewhere because every point you make I've already addressed earlier in the thread.

So he's not an ATG because he lacked dedication?

If we have evidence of where Toney struggled repeatedly to make weight, how exactly is that an excuse?

Haye was awful against Valuev. What fight did you watch?

[IronDanHamza]

So he's not an ATG because he lacked dedication?

If we have evidence of where Toney struggled repeatedly to make weight, how exactly is that an excuse?

Haye was awful against Valuev. What fight did you watch?

No I've explained many times now why I don't feel he's an ATG and made it extremely clear for you as you appear to struggle.

It's an excuse because you blame it entirely on that when I don't believe that's the entire reason.

Haye was awful, but he far from struggled. He won almost every round.