How could Roy Jones Junior be the best of this era?

[Sweet Pete]

McCallum was coming off wins over Herol Graham and Michael Watson, two of the best defensive fighters you'll see, and showed he certainly wasn't shot in the Toney fights themselves - they were two of his best-ever performances

Sosa was an animal, Eubank ducked Littles who was undeafeted and had amateur wins over Jones and McClellan, and Prince Charles was very, very, very good

He didn't fight Eubank or Benn but he certainly wanted to, while Hopkins meant nothing

His win over Nunn was a masterclass in staying calm and applying a plan

He also was one of the few proper defensive, non-running, boxers and has foguht a huge amount of fights, including non-title bouts between fights

In 1991 he did more than most HOF fighters in the course of a single year. Wins over Sosa, Nunn and a draw against McCallum

Awesome fighter

Well, you exaggerrate many points, such as that last bit about the HOF career, but noone is denying he is an awesome fighter, just that you shun too many other fighters when placing him that high.

[Orange Sneakers]

Sorry I forgot to mention Reggie Johnson - he was as slick as a greaseball back then, southpaw. What a first title defense!

[shawn_]

He was a very skilled fighter, seen a lot of prime Toney. Trust me, I am not one to speak on fighters I've not seen a lot of or haven't studied on(more regarding old timers). I consider myself a student of the game and an historian/boxing analyst.

Toney in his prime was a prime example to me of someone who looked great against the right opponent, someone like a Barkley, but who also looked pretty bad against certain styles.

Here's the thing with Toney. Mayweather is more skilled than him. I mean this by, Mayweather has a very similar inside game and defense to Toney, but what Toney lacks(movement and a top notch outside game) Mayweather provides. Someone like Floyd is more well-rounded than Toney. Movers/boxers could give Toney problems. Fellow slicksters were his downfall, which is why I doubt even on his A game he could've given Roy much more of a fight.

Roy was the ultimate foe for counter-punchers. Someone who was so quick he could hit you and pop out before you had a chance to hit him. He would set up moves where he could counter the counter puncher, and would force Toney to play aggressor, setting him up to be countered instead. Someone like a Roy Jones, and even(though you may not like this) possibly a Joe Calzaghe could've beaten him a lot(Calzaghe was there to get hit more and brawl more, so Toney has a shot to beat him). This is why Toney had so much trouble with a fellow slickster like Griffin, and a mover like Nunn.

He looked beautiful when on his game against the right opponent, but if you watched some of his fights, he wasn't versatile enough, not well versed against as many styles as so many other greats.

That is not correct. James Toney had trouble with movers simply because of his lack of dedication. He could not put forth the energy needed to chase them down and still mount an offense.

James Toney at 160lb was light on his feet, could move very well, could box from the outside. And only had trouble with southpaws.

While I do believe that you do study fighters, as I have stated before, you do not yet understand the nuances of the inside game, otherwise you would not be comparing Mayweathers inside game to James Toney's.

Most of the fighters that James Toney had trouble with were either southpaws, which give him trouble because of his shoulder roll defense, or fighters that James Toney did not prepare for.

If you would like, I could educate you on the nuances of the inside game and what made James Toney such a special fighter.

[K-Nan]

Great debate in here, guys. I love to see real boxing buffs talk it out.

Sweet Pete- surely you can't discredit Toney's win over Tim Littles? He was a very dangerous guy back then.

[shawn_]

Well, you exaggerrate many points, such as that last bit about the HOF career, but noone is denying he is an awesome fighter, just that you shun too many other fighters when placing him that high.

Wait, so you don't even think James Toney is a hall-of-fame fighter? Wow. You really do have trouble appreciating the subtleties of the sport, which is what made James Toney so good.

Trying to knock Toneys resume isn't that smart either since he literally fought everyone that would fight him, no matter the purse, no matter his condition. The guy has one of the best resumes in modern day boxing, plus he fought ALL THE TIME.

[K-Nan]

Wait, so you don't even think James Toney is a hall-of-fame fighter? Wow. You really do have trouble appreciating the subtleties of the sport, which is what made James Toney so good.

Trying to knock Toneys resume isn't that smart either since he literally fought everyone that would fight him, no matter the purse, no matter his condition. The guy has one of the best resumes in modern day boxing, plus he fought ALL THE TIME.

Also- considering the fact that they let anybody into the HOF, JT is a shoo-in.

[Orange Sneakers]

The same Montell Griffin that Roy Jones Jr knocked out in the first round?

No, the same Montell Griffin who put abit of a schooling on Roy - outfeinting him and outboxing him, and beating him!

Then he got rid of Eddie Futch

[shawn_]

Also- considering the fact that they let anybody into the HOF, JT is a shoo-in.

Even if the requirements were much more stringent, James Toney is a shoo-in. That would be like keeping Archie Moore out of the hall of fame.

[Azteca]

James Toney is overated.

[Sweet Pete]

That is not correct. James Toney had trouble with movers simply because of his lack of dedication. He could not put forth the energy needed to chase them down and still mount an offense.

That excuse is utterly ridiculous. Every time anyone says anything bad about Toney, a Toney fan will blame it on lack of dedication. Any loss was based on lack of dedication. Roy Jones always had the style to not only beat Toney, but pretty much all counter-punchers like him. What I'd like to hear is how you think a prime Toney beats a prime Jones.

James Toney at 160lb was light on his feet, could move very well, could box from the outside. And only had trouble with southpaws.

What high level fighters of the caliber I suggested did he face there? And as for saying every fault in his life was due to lack of dedication,what about Montell Griffin? How does he lose to the same B level fighter twice? Surely he'd be a bit more dedicated in the rematch. I think Reggie Strickland was actually better than Toney, just lacked the dedication is all.

While I do believe that you do study fighters, as I have stated before, you do not yet understand the nuances of the inside game, otherwise you would not be comparing Mayweathers inside game to James Toney's.

I'll hear you out to see your view. Mayweather's style on the inside was similar, though on the inside Toney was more versatile and more offensive due to his ability to take a hit and stand his ground to take risks better. Mayweather liked to pop in and out a bit more.

Most of the fighters that James Toney had trouble with were either southpaws, which give him trouble because of his shoulder roll defense, or fighters that James Toney did not prepare for.

Montell Griffin? Twice? Didn't prepare for him either time?

If you would like, I could educate you on the nuances of the inside game and what made James Toney such a special fighter.

No thanks, I'd say I've got it down just fine. I just think you make a bit too many excuses.