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

[BKM-]

Well that's just one part. I not only believe Hopkins would beat Toney I also believe he's a better fighter in general. Even the 28 year old version. So IMO it's a better win.

I understand I am in the minority there and the idea that I'm afraid to make a poll due to the chances of being "wrong" is laughable. Like I previously pointed out, I am well aware that Toney would win a poll if that question were to be asked. I'm well aware that the majority would consider Toney a better win. I don't follow the crowd though I have my own mind and I've given valid reasoning as to why I believe Hopkins is a better win.

Make a decision? Pure nonsense.

What you've just said is literally gibberish.

So firstly, Toney being overrated means Jones is overrated? What kind of ridiculous logic is that?

Secondly, my thread isn't about Jones being "underrated" so that point you've made there is moot. I've explained to you three times what my thread is about must I explain it to you again?

Thirdly, by what logic does "admitting Toney is not overrated" equate to Roy Jones being underrated?

At no point have I made a single implication that I feel Roy Jones is underrated.

Now I will explain to you how both of my threads can easily co-exist;

1. James Toney IS overrated IMO, nor is he an ATG IMO. That has absolutely no bearing or relevance to my thread what so ever. It also doesn't have any knock on Roy because despite the fact Toney's overrated and not an ATG it's still an impressive dominant victory over a sure fire first ballot HOFer in their prime.

2. My thread about Roy Jones, as I've once again clearly stated, has nothing to do with James Toney as one of his opponents. My thread is about specific Roy Jones opponents (WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE JAMES TONEY) and whether or not those opponents are "weak", by comparing his performances against them to the other top fighters of that era.

Extremely simple.

Stop saying "As I said already" over and over again, you're sounding like a broken record pal. I told you I don't care how much you deny it, you made those threads with those intentions and you can't convince me otherwise because of everything you said already, you're just back-peddling now as you realise what a contradicting arsewipe you've been on this subject.
It's been such an incredible flip flop here it's actually entertaining.

Yeah true you 'don't follow the crowd' you're more like the opposite, the edgy one who always goes against the grain for controversy. Except this time you screwed yourself by stiffing your main main RJJ while hating on the wrong fighter. That's pretty fitting actually. "But but but I explained you it's not like that" Yeah yeah I already know it's coming again, save your breath. You also really love absolutes don't you? It's always "I have never in any way whatsoever in the history of mankind done that and it has absolutely nothing in the history of the world to do with that" LOL. Quote from you:

I tend to see people say Roy Jones opposition was weak. He didn't fight top calibur opponents. preposterous

And yet you claim that you weren't saying Roy's underrated. You're insane. There is no talking to you at all.

[IronDanHamza]

Stop saying "As I said already" over and over again, you're sounding like a broken record pal. I told you I don't care how much you deny it, you made those threads with those intentions and you can't convince me otherwise because of everything you said already, you're just back-peddling now as you realise what a contradicting arsewipe you've been on this subject.
It's been such an incredible flip flop here it's actually entertaining.

Yeah true you 'don't follow the crowd' you're more like the opposite, the edgy one who always goes against the grain for controversy. Except this time you screwed yourself by stiffing your main main RJJ while hating on the wrong fighter. That's pretty fitting actually. "But but but I explained you it's not like that" Yeah yeah I already know it's coming again, save your breath. You also really love absolutes don't you? It's always "I have never in any way whatsoever in the history of mankind done that" LOL. Quote from you:


And yet you claim that you weren't saying Roy's underrated. You're insane. There is no talking to you at all.

Why leave out the rest of the sentence and the following sentence? What does the rest of it and the following sentence say?

I tend to see people say Roy Jones opposition was weak. He didn't fight top calibur opponents. Preposterous in my view but let's take a delve into his alleged "weak opponents".

I'm purposely not going to go into the fights that don't need explaining (most notably Toney and Hopkins) just the fights that are claimed to be "weak opponents";

I think it's pretty clear what my thread is about. That's if you missed the enormous clue in the thread title that states "Roy Jones Jr's alleged weak opponents" I mean don't think it takes a rocket scientist to workout the thesis of the thread.

At no point is there any implication that I feel Roy Jones is underrated and for the record I defintely do NOT feel that way in any way, shape or form. ATG? Most defintely. Underrated? Certainly not. So that once again leaves your nonsense point at moot.

Ok mate well I don't care that you don't care I don't need to convince you of anything. It doesn't take a genius to understand how both threads can clearly co-exist and are free of contradiction. If you actually believe that my Roy Jones thread is to prove Roy Jones is underrated then more power to you mate believe what you want.

Please explain to me at what point have flipped flopped or back peddled on anything I've said in either thread? I've been consistent throughout both.

Thread 1 - James Toney is overrated and not an ATG IMO

Thread 2 - Are these specific fighters Roy Jones fought really as "weak" as people tend to make out?

That is literally as simple as I can make it for you. Clearly no contradictions, no flip flopping and no back pedalling. My words are very clear.

[sonnyboyx2]

You'd have a much easier time citing a Toney fight worth mentioning that wasn't close.

I've got Barkley, Little, erm, top of my head I genuinely can't think of another one.

Even the fights he pulled the KO in, Nunn he was well behind and Prince Charles Williams was a close one also.

Quite alot of Toney fights were very close, simply because he was fighting "World Class" opponents. Which again is testament to his abilities.

McCallum - world class
Barkley - world class
Nunn - world class
Griffin - world class
Jirov - world class
Williams - world class
Johnson - world class
Peter
Rahman
Holyfield
Ruiz
etc etc

[sonnyboyx2]

My opinion is vastly different to your opinion of James Toney...
Toney has a professional record of 76-10-3 but IMO his record should be 82-6-1 with his defeats all coming at the tail-end of his career, bar the Jones fight.

Dan you have down-played Toney's Heavyweight fights, throughout this thread. I asked you to name me another 160lb champion, who competed at heavyweight, defeating opponents of the quality Toney did. Or putting up such performances as Toney did against the heavyweights?

[HughJass]

James Toney IS an ATG,no doubt about it.I'll tell you who's career was overrated in the 90's,Chris Eubank.

[IronDanHamza]

Quite alot of Toney fights were very close, simply because he was fighting "World Class" opponents. Which again is testament to his abilities.

McCallum - world class
Barkley - world class
Nunn - world class
Griffin - world class
Jirov - world class
Williams - world class
Johnson - world class
Peter
Rahman
Holyfield
Ruiz
etc etc

How many ATG's fought more and better world class opponents and didn't struggle win all of the above and failed to impressively dominate almost all of them?

[Syf]

Why can't we expect blowouts when Roy Jones blew out the same guys the likes of Toney, Eubank, Collins etc etc etc either lost to or struggled with?

You may prefer to watch back and forth fights but we're not taking preference here we are analaysing someone. Impressive dominant performances are better than performances that aren't those things.

I've explained why I think McCallum is an ATG. He beat better fights than Toney, he was more dominant than Toney, he beat top level fighters in dominant and impressive fashion. Toney got a draw with McCallum and got the decision in the second one but I thought McCallum won. The third fight shouldn't even be mentioned.

Where does the logic not add up?

If we are assuming Roy and Mike are atg, then the argument for JT being atg is there. They are intrinsically linked.

We shouldn't expect Roy'esque blowouts because Roy employed a certain mobile, explosive, and destructive style. This was facilitated by the fact he was a freak of nature. Toney was more of a slick work horse with pretty good pop. There was fluidity and grace to his movements, and his core rotation was second to none. His feet were more often than not set to support his rotational platform that was his bread and butter.

A guy with a style like his is destined to have many more close fights than a guy with Roy's methodology of movement. Roy was shock and awe, covering distance that people did not expect, and launching assaults at speeds they weren't prepared for. Toney had defense, but he wasn't a defensive master. He still got tagged and scored upon. He was proficient at mitigating damage however, and that skill carried him all the way to HW. But his rotational skill was just as often, if not more, used as a platform to launch his offense. He liked to set traps.

The rub is, even if he lands a potentially debilitating counter shot, he doesn't have great ability to finish like Roy did. The result is his opponent is allowed to recover because his (Toney's) feet tend to be set. Surely you see my point? Toney's methodology of movement ain't allow for the same kind of dominating performances! In fact, it inevitably meant many of his more toughly matched opponents would be close battles.

The crux of your position seems to be based on Toney's "poor performances" and not having too many dominating wins... But it's not that simple... Different styles require different methodologies which require different strategies, which yield vastly different out comes in a fight. This all varies from fighter to fighter.

One final thing... Jones is not atg primarily by virtue of his resume... It's primarily because of the eye test... Even the most untrained of eyes sees he was a special fighter. Then, his resume, still very good, is sufficient enough for an awe inspiring specimen of a fighter that he was in his prime to be considered atg. JT, at the peak of his powers was also inspiring. He moved with fluidity and grace, and his craft was clearly honed to a razor thin edge. His resume... good, but not great... May just be good enough to get him atg status given how he had mastery over his particular methodology of movement. Clear to see to all who have the eye. Doesn't hurt that his ,methods even preserved him at HW either! If we have Mike as an atg that would push him (Toney)even farther towards the goal post.

[IronDanHamza]

My opinion is vastly different to your opinion of James Toney...
Toney has a professional record of 76-10-3 but IMO his record should be 82-6-1 with his defeats all coming at the tail-end of his career, bar the Jones fight.

Dan you have down-played Toney's Heavyweight fights, throughout this thread. I asked you to name me another 160lb champion, who competed at heavyweight, defeating opponents of the quality Toney did. Or putting up such performances as Toney did against the heavyweights?

In your opinion he should be that. IMO he lost to Johnson, Tiberi, McCallum, Griffin, Jones and Thadzi all in his prime years. Works both ways.

How was Tiberi at the tail end of his career that was in 1992. And he clearly lost that fight in one of the worst robberies in the history of the sport.

Defeating? Who did Toney defeat at Heavyweight? He beat Evander into the retirement home then he lost to Peter twice and drew with Rahman. Ruiz is an NC if I recall correctly.

You want me to name fighters who started at Middleweight and competed with Heavyweights;

Billy Conn started at 135 lbs and went up and boxed circles around Joe Louis.

Chris Byrd started at Middleweight and went on to win a title at HW.

Floyd Patterson started his career at 163 lbs went on to be Heavyweight Champikn

Eddie Mustafa Muhammad started his career at 150 lbs and went up to lose a close decision to contender Reinaldo Snipes who we all know as the guy who dropped and badly hurt Larry Holmes in his valiant loss to him.

Bob Fitzsimmons, self explanatory.

Roy Jones 154 to heavyweight and won a title there.

I'm sure I've missed some.

You guys rate Toney moving up to Heavyweight and losing and drawing with contenders highly. I don't.

Most of the above won titles, Toney didn't.

[IronDanHamza]

If we are assuming Roy and Mike are atg, then the argument for JT being atg is there. They are intrinsically linked.

We shouldn't expect Roy'esque blowouts because Roy employed a certain mobile, explosive, and destructive style. This was facilitated by the fact he was a freak of nature. Toney was more of a slick work horse with pretty good pop. There was fluidity and grace to his movements, and his core rotation was second to none. His feet were more often than not set to support his rotational platform that was his bread and butter.

A guy with a style like his is destined to have many more close fights than a guy with Roy's methodology of movement. Roy was shock and awe, covering distance that people did not expect, and launching assaults at speeds they weren't prepared for. Toney had defense, but he wasn't a defensive master. He still got tagged and scored upon. He was proficient at mitigating damage however, and that skill carried him all the way to HW. But his rotational skill was just as often, if not more, used as a platform to launch his offense. He liked to set traps.

The rub is, even if he lands a potentially debilitating counter shot, he doesn't have great ability to finish like Roy did. The result is his opponent is allowed to recover because his (Toney's) feet tend to be set. Surely you see my point? Toney's methodology of movement ain't allow for the same kind of dominating performances! In fact, it inevitably meant many of his more toughly matched opponents would be close battles.

The crux of your position seems to be based on Toney's "poor performances" and not having too many dominating wins... But it's not that simple... Different styles require different methodologies which require different strategies, which yield vastly different out comes in a fight. This all varies from fighter to fighter.

One final thing... Jones is not atg primarily by virtue of his resume... It's primarily because of the eye test... Even the most untrained of eyes sees he was a special fighter. Then, his resume, still very good, is sufficient enough for an awe inspiring specimen of a fighter that he was in his prime to be considered atg. JT, at the peak of his powers was also inspiring. He moved with fluidity and grace, and his craft was clearly honed to a razor thin edge. His resume... good, but not great... May just be good enough to get him atg status given how he had mastery over his particular methodology of movement. Clear to see to all who have the eye. Doesn't hurt that his ,methods even preserved him at HW either! If we have Mike as an atg that would push him (Toney)even farther towards the goal post.

I can agree with this. Good post.

I never disputed that there's an argument for Toney being an ATG. I'm just the opposing argument.

ATG or not he's still amongst the top fighters of the 90's.

[billeau2]

In your opinion he should be that. IMO he lost to Johnson, Tiberi, McCallum, Griffin, Jones and Thadzi all in his prime years. Works both ways.

How was Tiberi at the tail end of his career that was in 1992. And he clearly lost that fight in one of the worst robberies in the history of the sport.

Defeating? Who did Toney defeat at Heavyweight? He beat Evander into the retirement home then he lost to Peter twice and drew with Rahman. Ruiz is an NC if I recall correctly.

You want me to name fighters who started at Middleweight and competed with Heavyweights;

Billy Conn started at 135 lbs and went up and boxed circles around Joe Louis.

Chris Byrd started at Middleweight and went on to win a title at HW.

Floyd Patterson started his career at 163 lbs went on to be Heavyweight Champikn

Eddie Mustafa Muhammad started his career at 150 lbs and went up to lose a close decision to contender Reinaldo Snipes who we all know as the guy who dropped and badly hurt Larry Holmes in his valiant loss to him.

Bob Fitzsimmons, self explanatory.

Roy Jones 154 to heavyweight and won a title there.

I'm sure I've missed some.

You guys rate Toney moving up to Heavyweight and losing and drawing with contenders highly. I don't.

Most of the above won titles, Toney didn't.

Wasn't the first Pete fight a draw? Evander was still good when he fought Toney Dan. Roy won a title so let me ask you, do you think Roy had a better career at heavy beating a fighter like ruiz than Toney who beat Rahman, and drew/lost with Peter, and beat an atg? I see the substance of your argument but IMO you stray on this part of the argument into a weak area. If you want to qualify the wins of a fighter...a perfectly legitimate enterprise for the purposes of how you evaluate Toney, then you have to be particularly mindful of not giving credit where credit is due:

For example, Sam Peter was thought by many to be in the best shape of his life during the second Toney fight, thats a fact. Rahman was also in very good shape when he fought Toney...which would leave a reasonable man to at least consider that Toney being competative against Evander was not necessarily conditional. and no...Evander was not prime against Toney, thats not my point. Notice how I have not mentioned Toney's shape? lol

Also, one can compare Conn and perhaps mustafa to Toney because like Toney these guys were not intending to make it a career in the heavyweight division...we all know Toney went to the division to pick low hanging fruit and he compares quite favorably to men who have done that in the past.

Generalling speaking: I don't think you are fair to Toney regarding his heavyweight achievment. You know as well as i do that Ruiz was really low hanging fruit and an easy mark for Jones. Calling Ruiz a champ while true is a bit disengenius imo.

Otherwise I think your points regarding toney deserve some consideration...I never look at a judge's decision as the last word regarding a fight and we need people to watch the fights and describe what happened during the fight to have an accurate perception of a fighter's abilities.