Could James Toney ever have touched Roy Jones?

He didn't run away.

You don't need to run from a guy who you've recently beaten with ease.

How were they meaningless?

 

Especially when the reason for beating him was his passing out just prior to the weighing in due to being drained to near death due to his extreme bulimia.

I just explained for about the 7th time why the Griffin fights were meaningless.
Johnson was old and had nothing to do at 175 except from losing to a bigger, younger, fresher Jones for good money.
Hill was old and already exposed twice (if not more) as a weak titlist.

 

If Toney had better ability to cut the ring off and footspeed, he could've. Even though I respect Toney's skill, what he brings to the table isn't the right blend to exploit Roy's Achilles' heel.

Unfortunately, he's a bit one-dimensional offensively in the regard that he likes to be stationary and fight in the pocket.

With someone as content to stay on the outside and move for the entire 12, it's always going to be a tough matchup for Toney. Jones is the archetype of that- he's just not going to engage Toney in James' wheelhouse. Roy's smart enough to not fight James' fight, and Toney can't overcome that IMO.

 

Roy didn't see the victory over Toney in the way that you do.

The other fights weren't meaningless. That's a gross exaggeration.

The Griffin rematch was a great win, looking at how he knocked out a 180 plus guy with a lead uppercut.

Reggie was past prime, but he was still a good fighter, and it was to unify the division.

Hill was past prime, but it was a great knockout. Roy was the only guy ever to stop him.

Again, you won't give Roy credit for anything.

If everybody viewed fights the way you do, hardly any win would be considered great.

 

And I care so much about how Roy saw that victory.

That's the truth.

Nothing great about taking care that Griffin will be rushed cold into the ring and take advantage of it.
For just about the 8th time.

Reggie Johnson was both past prime and undersized for competing at 175, but it is already mentioned in my post you quoted.

Not only was Hill past his prime, he was nothing special even during his prime. He was previously exposed by a past his prime Thomas Hearns and by Dariusz Michalczewski.
His loss to Hearns was especially embarrassing and telling.
But again you made me repeat myself.

I give him for what he deserves which is convincingly beating both inexperienced Clinton Woods and inexperienced Julio Gonzalez.

Very few wins are great, people like you devalued the word great and most other words too.

 

There's no point taking this any further.

We'll agree to disagree.


:good

 

I generally respect Loudon's research and opinions, but as far as Roy Jones goes methinks he doth protest too much.

 

:good

 

I agree that you tried your best as usual to manipulate facts and claims by me but failed at convincing anyone meaningful (if any)

 

One of those great ironies in life

Toney could have gone undefeated for many more years if Roy didn't take away his confidence

Great irony

Toney is the better boxer
Better skills
Probably best chin of all time
Student of the game
Like teddy atlas says, the man can roll a punch in his sleep
And had legit ko power

Basically everything in the toolbox to make a perfect fighter

Roy jones

Never throws a jab
Looks bored most of the time
Au that point had fought no one except bhop (who wasn't so well known)
Roy jones did everything wrong in the ring

But was so physically gifted he got away with it even against HOFers

It's like when Floyd mayweather at the top of his game can make a HOF like Marquez look like an amateur

There will never he another Roy jones

 

Oh the irony!

Ha!

I ended the debate, because it was pointless.

I can accept that people may not share the opinion that I hold, but you are not in any way objective.

You are completely biased.

So what's the point?

I'm just wasting my time.

 

Manipulate what? Jones not giving Toney a rematch? Toney had a chance at one and lost to Griffin in their rematch - fact.

 

Never mind the fact Toney didn't deserve a rematch to begin with.

He lost 0-12 to Jones who barely broke a sweat and made him look like a one dimensional lead footed plodder.

If this was largely because Toney was weight drained then that is entirely James Toney's fault. If he lacked the professionalism and respect for his opponent to stay in shape between fights (that is if you buy him ballooning up that much in between fights anyway considering he looked very good beating Prince Charles Williams a scant 4 months previous already knowing he was fighting a huge fight and threat in Roy Jones) then that's his own fuc*ing fault and he doesn't deserve a pass for it.

People making excuses for these bozo's who lack the dedication to their sport to look after themselves and rip themselves and their fans off by turning up ill prepared sicken me. Toney had huge natural talent and great skills which made him a success despite him being a fat, lazy pig with an appalling diet and training habits. Bad luck for him he met someone with better natural talent, speed, athleticism and who was professional in his approach and dedication to the sport in Jones Jnr.

 

I am not biased.
You are biased.
You are also a manipulative liar and it was shown again and again in this thread and others by me and by others.
Not sure that you waste your time, since you are probably paid for it one way or another.
Seems like "Loudon" is just another account of someone that used to be well known here, but after being exposed time and time again as a corrupt journalist (journalists have an obvious interest in giving good exposure to people that cooperate well with them and supply them materials) , or just a dishonest low form of human being.

 

Roy lost to Griffin too, and so (should) did Eric Harding.
So it made them all equally undeserving at anything.
The thing is Roy never fought and would have never agreed to fight Toney if he thought Toney was even close to his relative "good shape".