A question to Roy Jones Jnr fans about his win over J Toney

I doubt it. Ward gives of some really weird vibes when he talks boxing these days, and he seemed a bit off already when he had won Super Six. Beating Carl Froch and a somewhat faded Mikkel Kessler isn't what I would call a very deep resume and at this rate it's not improving either.

Ward will lag behind both Joe and Roy when it comes to resume at SMW.

 

They did. I did. The thing with Toney was you had to look at him when he was at his best, and people did.

His weight troubles were always present - he was 200lbs in high school. He boiled down to make 160. Problem was he had a method of dropping 15lbs plus, then getting on the scales, then spending a few hours and sometimes overnight on IV drips. Not that unusual, but when you look at the frequency he fought at it left him sluggish.

The Johnson fight being a classic example. He has a gruelling fight against a guy nobody gave him a chance of beating and some considered pound for pound number one (Nunn), and barely six weeks later he has a fight with the recognised number two middleweight in Johnson. Toney binged after winning for a week, and then it was back to starving to make weight for that.

When he made weight correctly, he was magnificent (McCallum 1, Barkley, Nunn), when he didn't, he looked awful (Tiberi, Johnson, Jones Jr,)

 

favorite post of the thread has to be: "bailey, I don't want tough debates".

 

November 2007 -- 28 year old Mikkel Kessler, VIKING WARRIOR!!!!

November 2009 -- 30 year old Mikkel Kessler, slightly faded.

It's true, the sustained beating he took from Calzaghe was the kind of thing that shortens careers. The force of some of those blows, you could feel them. It hurt to watch. By round 7 I was screaming at the TV -- stop the fight! stop the fight!

 

What the fvck are you on about?

It was 20 months and 22 months before the draw with Toney in 91 that the 33 year old MM beat both Collins ,and Watson. He was 35 at the time of the Toney fight. Prior to Toney, he had barely scra ped a split decision against Kalambay, and had been taken the distance by a 16 fight novice, that was about as close to a bum as you can be.

You fools expect people to believe that the great Roid Jones went down hill in a period of 13 months, but apply your idiotic double standards to other fighters.

Don't make me laugh.

It's bad enough the Jones freaks on here think they know more about his opponents than they do. You have now got fvckwits on here claiming he beat Tibeiri, when Toney himself finally admitted that he didn't.

Roid fans and Pacturds, definitely 2 of a kind.

 

An outstanding post mate!

You've made some great points.

I agree entirely with everything that you've said.

Could you imagine someone like GGG fighting both Nunn and Reggie within a two month period? That was unbelievable.


:good

 

That's about right, and the tactics Ward applied is an issue as well. I think he's been declared the second coming just a tad too early. Impressive potential for sure, but what's the point if he aint gonna make use of it?

Come to think of it, didn't Roy went from top notch to shot a whole lot faster than Kessler started to slow down?

 

This is the biggest pile of sh it I've read on here for a good while.

What you really mean is you don't want anyone looking too closely at fat steroid cheating Toney's early shall we say " controversial " decisions because it might reflect badly on your own steroid cheating kunt Jones' alleged superiority at Middleweight, S / Middleweight.

Is it usual then for US senators to demand inquiries into fights as in the case of Toney / Tibeiri? Just well verdicts can't be reversed isn't it?

 

I don't understand your argument.

Again, nobody is saying that Mike at 35, was as good as he was at 27, but it's clear that he was still an elite fighter when he fought Toney in 1992. He went on to give Roy a good fight four years later in 1996.

Regarding Roy, there is no double standards. No two fighters are the same. Roy relied heavily on his speed and reflexes, and he didn't age as well. Roy went down hill after he'd come back from HW, and he was finished as a top level fighter at 35, whereas Mike wasn't. But you can't do direct comparisons with fighters, because everyone's circumstances are different.


:good

 

Zod doesn't like Roy. He's not a fan of his.

 

McCallum was very highly regarded at the time. This fight actually made Toney, rather than the Nunn fight as many seem to believe.

Toney was a 3-1 underdog, and many respected journalists and trainers incorrectly presumed that his victory over Nunn was a matter of luck and bad tactics by Nunn.

McCallum doesn't make tactical mistakes, and it was believed by most that the master would teach the baker's son a lesson. What transpired was a boxing masterclass and one of the great fights of the last 30 years. Toney outboxed one of the best boxers on the planet.

HBO did a phone in survey of who viewers though won the fight. Only 10% polled thought McCallum won. 85% Toney, 5% a draw.

The resounding noise from the boxing press was shock. Toney is for real.

 

Loudon, you are normally sensible and at least try to be balanced in your replies. Don't ffs end up like the Gimperials, and Dizzy Lizzies, and talk garbage.

Mike McCallum was fvck all like the fighter who beat Collins, and Watson, when he DREW with Toney, never mind lost to him 9 months later. If Jones or Toney had been around when Mike was in his prime 86 - 88 ( yes even the fight he lost to Kalambay ) they wouldn't have gone anywhere near him.

As for the sh it you wrote about giving Roid a good fight in 96, you are just insulting the man. It was an embarrassing shut out on all three cards, and righty so. By that stage the only rings Mike should have been allowed near were in jeweller's shops.

:good

 

The fight he had with Roy was a fix. Roy and his cronies had judges from the Florida commission partake, instead of the judges appointed by the WBC.

They gave 120-107 on all three cards. It wasn't. The judges from the WBC who watched the fight had it 1116-111. I agree with that.

Watch the fight instead of using Boxrec.

 

That's right, Mike was still regarded as an elite fighter at the time. He wasn't seen as a guy who was shot.

:good

 

Why was the version of Mike that fought Toney in 91, nothing like the version that fought Watson in 90?

He gave a good account of himself against Roy, and he made Roy very cautious. Roy had a lot of respect for him, but I agree that he should have retired by then.

What did you think of his fight against Tiozzo?


:good