Is James Toney the Shaq of Boxing?

[chrisJS]

I would without any question rank Morales and Barrera above him.

Others that I would rank above him from that list that I would consider arguable;

Trinidad
Oscar
Lewis
Mosley

What was weird about that spell from Griffin to Crusier? And how does it differ from any other spell in his career?

That he wasn't fighting regular title fights and he took two years off almost. I think his competition level was higher before then too.

Mosley over him? Meh. He probably had a more consistent and dominant run (1997-2001) but with the exception of beating Oscar (and arguably losing a re-match) he basically lost and often was dominated by top fighters. I also don't think he was nearly as impressive overall as a fighter either.

[New England]

shaq, while he was healthy, ran the court all night for 70-80 basketball games a year. boxers are sort of a perfect storm for getting out of shape. when they don't have a fight scheduled most of them take time to let their bodies heal. in toney's case he ate and he ate and he ate as well.


so no, shaq was never in a position to get that out of shape while he was in his prime and playing. he was also a legitimately giant man. he weighed 2x as much as toney for stretches of his career when he wasn't all that out of shape. he was also over a foot taller, had a size 24 shoe, etc. it's just a completely different planet in terms of what constitutes being in shape or your workload. you cannot wake up every morning and pound the pavement for weeks or even a couple of months if you're shaq. if you're james toney you definitely can, he just didn't when he wasn't getting down to 160 or 168 lbs and requiring it.

[IronDanHamza]

That he wasn't fighting regular title fights and he took two years off almost. I think his competition level was higher before then too.

Mosley over him? Meh. He probably had a more consistent and dominant run (1997-2001) but with the exception of beating Oscar (and arguably losing a re-match) he basically lost and often was dominated by top fighters. I also don't think he was nearly as impressive overall as a fighter either.

Oh ok. I don't think fighting less should hold him back.

I wouldn't argue if someone had Toney ahead of him.

Yeah good points but Toney lost to journeyman in his prime, so, yeah.

But outside of Roy Jones and he wasn't dominated by anyone.

But then again Tiberi and Thadzi beat him clearly much like Forrest and Wright beat Toney clearly.

They're comparable atleast.

[Anthony342]

Oh ok. I don't think fighting less should hold him back.

I wouldn't argue if someone had Toney ahead of him.

Yeah good points but Toney lost to journeyman in his prime, so, yeah.

But outside of Roy Jones and he wasn't dominated by anyone.

But then again Tiberi and Thadzi beat him clearly much like Forrest and Wright beat Toney clearly.

They're comparable atleast.

Good points made and agree on your assessment of James Toney. Do you think he had potential or could've been great, had he worked harder, in your opinion?

[IronDanHamza]

Good points made and agree on your assessment of James Toney. Do you think he had potential or could've been great, had he worked harder, in your opinion?

Perhaps yeah. Who knows. I think the guys who gave him problems would always give him problems. He has too many holes in his game.

I think the fact he is one dimensional and lacks Ring IQ will always be the two main things that hold him back though.

[Anthony342]

Perhaps yeah. Who knows. I think the guys who gave him problems would always give him problems. He has too many holes in his game.

I think the fact he is one dimensional and lacks Ring IQ will always be the two main things that hold him back though.

Cool. Whose in your avatar?

[IronDanHamza]

Cool. Whose in your avatar?

Middleweight Champion **** Tiger.

[IronDanHamza]

I respect your opinion and I know we cannot come to agreement because we see some fundamental things very differently, but let me get your opinions on couple things then - because obviously it's all relative when we talk about fighters greatness.
A:

Is there anyone that you also don't consider great - who started at MW - fighting the best at that weight - and then was competing with top 10 HW like Holyfield(Still solid imo!) and Peter?
Another thing is that in old days, those HW were nothing like modern heavyweights. Those guys who Bob Fitzsimmons beat for HW title for example... were 185 pounds. Jirov, cruiserweight, was way bigger than that... so it's a bit different.
185 lbs, fight night - is small Light Heavyweight today.

B:

I don't think that "HOF" label reflects quality of fighters.. particulary at their peak. It's a lot about body of work, career hype and opportunities.
If you don't get a fights that can make you HOF-er, you're not going to be HOF-er.

I think Reggie was fantastic fighter.... He had those 3 fights in Argentina - I thought he won all 3 of those, but because he didn't have any money/promotional push behind him, he got rough side of a deal and with 3 losses, his career went downhill.
That's how it works, not everyone gets the same opportunities.

He also beat Steve Collins, Lamar Parks - excellent contenders and even in 2008 when he beat Julio Gonzalez - that could've been for a belt as Julio just got robbed against Clinton Woods imo..


As for Nunn, there's plenty of people who rate him, in his prime, as potential ATG... and while that might be a stretch, I think everyone who saw him in his peak can recognise he wasn't an ordinary fighter.
His issues later in his career are well publicised also, but I don't think it takes away what he was in his short-lived prime - and how great of an achievement was Toney to pull that one off from behind.


So my question would be - how many Middleweights that you'd also say aren't really great - have better 3 top wins than prime Nunn and Reggie and slightly(Imo, you might disagree?) past it Mike McCallum.

By the way - considering quality of first fight between Mike and James - probably my single favorite fight of all time - I give both guys a lot of credit for that draw. Performance is performance, it's not all about what 3 people sitting ringside put on the piece of paper.

Erm, off the top of my head I can't think of any but that's a very specific question.

There are fighters that started as low as MW that went on to compete at HW but I can't think of any that fought the top guys at MW at went to HW (that aren't great) but I don't think doing that equals greatness. I mean, hos HW resume is not good either.

Reggie was a very good fighter yes, I'm a fan of him. But he was never an elite level fighter. He was never considered to be a P4P level guy. I give Toney credit for that win (even though I thought he lost) but it was no robbery.

Nunn, I disagree with you I think he absolutely was ordinary. I think Nunn was massively overrated when he was undefeated and a very flawed fighter. You are right he was touted as the next legend, but then again so was Adrien Broner. So were loads of fighters. Nunn for me again a good fighter but not elite. But Toney stopped him so you have to give credit.

McCallum was great, past it but still top level. But Toney didn't beat McCallum in 91. He did get the W over him at MW so again fair enough but I also thought he lost that one.

Johnson, Nunn and McCallum 2 I will admit looks good on paper but if we look deeper into the fights I don't think it's as impressive as it seems.

I respect your opinion also and can see your points. It's a breath of fresh air to actually have a good discussion on this topic.

[IronDanHamza]

I give him more credit for those than you, which we already established - but I see where you're coming from.
I also agree with what you wrote here to someone else (Regarding potential greatness in Toney):


But while I agree he's not ATG - the fact that he was able to perform the way he performed in at least 4 fights on very high level - Twice with Mike, with Reggie and Nunn... Having argument for winning all 4(Or losing 3 of those probably, but still)
With Mike having similar style and being FAR better technician and other two - slick southpaw boxers - being nightmare style clashes for him in my view (So it's not like he got right fights at the right time at all, imo!)
Doing that in very short span of time - To me is a great achievement... He pulled that off because he had unique qualities with his mindset imo.

Are there fighters who did equally and more impressive things? Of course - but those who come to mind are going to be consensus ATGs, which says something imo.

Thanks for good discussion also. Educative and fun.

Oh there is no doubt that Toney took the hardest fights. No one can deny that.

He ducked no one and would fight anyone. And he did fight everyone. He deserves a lot of credit for that for sure.

[New England]

Oh there is no doubt that Toney took the hardest fights. No one can deny that.

He ducked no one and would fight anyone. And he did fight everyone. He deserves a lot of credit for that for sure.

so the guy goes from MW to HW, fighting everyone, displaying great skills on offense and defense as well as an all time great chin, and winning world titles and even becoming the best in the world at middleweight; and you rate him how?


you see how people who see those accomplishments in contrast to your evaluation of the fighter come very quickly and unanimously to the conclusion that you're biased anmd just don't like the guy, right?