Duva Fuming at Peter-Toney rematch talk

[GunStar]

I've never been a nuthugger for any boxer. I like the sport, not the individuals involved in it.

Right is right, wrong is wrong.

Gunstar, I had it closer than the judges had it, but I still had Peter winning. It was a matter of effectiveness, and while Toney was landing a few good shots every now and then, they did nothing to stop Peter from coming forward. On the other hand, Peter's jab was knocking Toney backwards.
I've long been a proponent of mandatory drug testing for judges, and of late it seems to be needed even more.

I would not call missing most of your punches effectiveness, I watched the fight for the second time and I had Toney winning by even a bigger margin.

Anyway I think your one of the good posters here and I respect you, but I think your way off on this fight!

[Abe Attell]

I think the Peter needs to be sent a serious warning about his punches to the back of the head of his opponents...it's a really serious matter...learn to fight by the boxing rules or GTFO of boxing

[vB Martin]

You were looking at the number of punches landed, while I was looking at the effect of the punches. We were scoring 2 different ways.

[DiegoFuego]

Even though the screwjob in the first fight had me enraged, the WBC is still full of ****. They just order rematches whenever they figure the rematch will make for a great show (Corrales-Castillo II, for example) or make guys mandatories just so they can see a good fight (Wright vs. Taylor, for example). The WBC is a joke, but Toney does deserve the rematch. I think Peter should be man enough to give it to him instead of having the WBC have to order some bull**** rematch that they shouldn't have the power to make.

[beez721]

I've never been a nuthugger for any boxer. I like the sport, not the individuals involved in it.

Right is right, wrong is wrong.

Gunstar, I had it closer than the judges had it, but I still had Peter winning. It was a matter of effectiveness, and while Toney was landing a few good shots every now and then, they did nothing to stop Peter from coming forward. On the other hand, Peter's jab was knocking Toney backwards.
I've long been a proponent of mandatory drug testing for judges, and of late it seems to be needed even more.

glad someone knows how to score a fight. it was a close fight and the scoring having peter up by 5 points was ridiculous but peter did do just enough to eke out a close decision. toney and his cry baby nuthuggers need to get over it and move on

[DiegoFuego]

glad someone knows how to score a fight. it was a close fight and the scoring having peter up by 5 points was ridiculous but peter did do just enough to eke out a close decision. toney and his cry baby nuthuggers need to get over it and move on

you're a joke

[Leo Pradun]

I think they should fight again, a win ending in a contreversial split decison is not a win plus Maskaev is fightign some bum Okhello so is Peter going to do wait 1 year to fight Maskaev

[beez721]

you're a joke

well of course,,becuase I saw your hero lose a close fight. grow up and get over it. everyone is sick and tired of your crying about it

[restless_438]

seriously vB, if your gonna talka bout who won that fight using the words "effectiveness", Toney took it, hands down

but yeah, it's like this,

Duva knows his fighter got a gift = No rematch for his fighter's opponent

[vB Martin]

effectiveness would mean that he was able to keep Peter off of him, which he wasn't.
effetiveness would mean that his punches would have slowed Peter down (god, would that have been a nightmare), but they didn't
effectiveness would have meant he, in some small way, affected Peter's game, which he didn't

The only thing he did was give Peter a bloody nose, which that many jans to the face from a lightweight would have done.

On the other hand, Peter visibly moved Toney with his punches, wobbled him a few times and threaw Toney's game completely off. That's what effectiveness is.

The first lesson is free.