Toney-Peter 2: Good For Boxing?

[Explosivo]

I disagree with the article. No matter what the WBC says, the fact that they are making those two fight agin is a good thing. Like he says in the article, to the observer, it looked like James won the fight. IMO, all the WBC is trying to do here is make sure the right guy gets the title fight. And face it, James Toney is good for boxing. We need to keep this guy working as long as possible.

[xAUGUSTUSx]

[QUOTE=Explosivo;1812347]I disagree with the article. No matter what the WBC says, the fact that they are making those two fight agin is a good thing. Like he says in the article, to the observer, it looked like James won the fight. IMO, all the WBC is trying to do here is make sure the right guy gets the title fight. And face it, James Toney is good for boxing. We need to keep this guy working as long as possible.[/QUOTE

Exactly and I totally agree with you on the God crap.

[JEBoxing]

Toney

the point is quite right.

it is however pathetic how the author tries to disguise he hates toney with his guts for the 1st part of the article, but just cant conceal it to the end.

I'd be interested to find out what you define as "hate." I clearly thought Toney won the fight -- that wasn't the point of the article. The facts about him are of the indisputable variety.

[JEBoxing]

It's another Toney hater "JE Grant" article!

In case you didn't notice I wrote a post-fight article that stated in no uncertain terms that I thought Toney won. I listed facts about him that are clearly correct. Are you really saying that to see this as unfair is "hating" James Toney? How could anyone "hate" a fighter who has proven his worth over so many years? That said, he doesn't deserve a number one rating.

[JEBoxing]

This isn't judgment by the media, maybe judgment by the masses, but obviously the WBC saw tape of the fight and agreed that Toney was unusally ****d that night by the judges. I agree that their should be some kind of disciplinary action for judges when scorecards deviate like they did in the toney-peter fight and they should have some qualifications and be tested before each fight. But the fact of the matter is that the WBC is trying to bring credibility and honesty to boxing and simply trying to make the right decision.

Really? Did you see who they are sanctioning for Maskaev's first defense????

[j]

i don't really like this decision to have toney fight yet again for a shot at a belt. one thing i didn't like about this decision was the amount of time it took to get this decision. it didn't happen immediately after the fight, which raises some questions in my mind - like why now?

And face it, James Toney is good for boxing. We need to keep this guy working as long as possible.

completely disagree. while i would agree that toney is an exceptional boxer, i can't see how having an overweight, trash talking racist ******* could be good for the sport. he's not an exciting fighter outside of impressive counterpunching skills and almost literally cries about losing any decision. he was lucky to get a draw with rahman - really lucky.

[GunStar]

In case you didn't notice I wrote a post-fight article that stated in no uncertain terms that I thought Toney won. I listed facts about him that are clearly correct. Are you really saying that to see this as unfair is "hating" James Toney? How could anyone "hate" a fighter who has proven his worth over so many years? That said, he doesn't deserve a number one rating.

I could careless if you think Toney won the Peter fight. Read your article again. You clearly don't like Toney, keep writing these articles over and over again, so I can have a good laugh.

BTW I've also seen your last 2 top 20 heavyweight ranking which is a joke.

[j]

BTW I've also seen your last 2 top 20 heavyweight ranking which is a joke.

do you have a link to them, or could you remember what you didn't like about them. just curious.

[GunStar]

do you have a link to them, or could you remember what you didn't like about them. just curious.

http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=5379

http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=5023

[j]

alright, thanks.

well, i've seen worst lists. myself, i would switch a few names around. just to name a couple of things, i don't think brock should be as high as he was and i don't think that chris byrd should've been dropped off the top ten just from losing to klitschko(even though he did get crushed.)