RJJ or James Toney?

If you're going to count a 40yr old Holyfield you would have to count the McCallum RJJ beat. Holyfield was a mere shell. Jones win over Toney trumps all those names as a single win.

 

Toney was not in proper share, did not look sharp at all. I find the Nunn win of Toney to be much more impressive.

 

Yes but the version of McCallum RJJ beat was better than the version of Holyfield Toney beat imo.

Toney fought that version of McCallum 3 months after Jones did and had a much closer bout with him. Jones shut him out on all 3 cards. Jones certainly beat that version much easier than Toney did.

The win over Nunn pales in comparison to Jones schooling of Toney. Toney was number 1 or 2 P4P in boxing from memory and barely won a round. Toney was way behind on the cards against Nunn and had been outclassed most of the night.

If Jones win over Toney doesn't outclass Toney's win over Nunnthen Toney can't be that much of a scalp.

 

I hear no end of excuses for Toney but the fact is in the biggest fight of his life he was completely schooled.

I can't fathom how Toney's win over Nunn can be more impressive than Jones absolute outclassing of the P4P no. 1 or whatever he was. Nunn outboxed Toney almost all night.

Peak Jones was basically untouchable in his own era. He went 15! years without a loss excepting the silly DQ which he annulled in under 3 minutes and beat a peak ATG by making him look silly. By comparison prime Toney had a couple of draws, was whupped by Jones, was beaten not once but twice by a guy Jones knocked out in a single round etc etc.

Jones career far eclipses Toney's.

 

Oh. I misread the OP. I thought the comparison was up until Jones won a HW title, but it was until their respective wins of a HW belt. Ok. Technically I don't think Toney ever won a HW world title since his win over Ruiz was declared an NC, but let's disregard that.

In that case toney might have the somewhat better top wins in Nunn, Jirov, Holy, Ruiz and Barkley, but still Jones overall for me seeing he had fewer losses and draws and more emphatic wins.

Of course not. Jones' win over Toney is better than Toney's over Nunn, and Jones' win over Ruiz is better than Toney's over an injured Holy. I also think Toney clearly lost the rematch to McCallum.

I don't know if Toney was done from draining himself for Jones, he might have been, and I don't know he if Nunn had been on a diet of coke and women before the fight with Toney, he might have been, but I do know that Toney scored a come from behind victory over Nunn while Jones handily outclassed Toney. Anyway you splice it, Jones' win is the better one.

 

I really like Toney, but when was his prime if not when he had his ass handed tom him by Jones? A couple of years earlier when he needed a gift to get past Tiberi or a couple of years later when he lost to Thadzi?

 

Toney's last fight with McCallum was right after Jones fought him and Jones was far more impressive. It's a good comparison of them against the same fighter right around the same time. Griffin is as well, who Jones sparked and toney lsot twice to.

Jones would have easily defeated any version of McCallum.

James drained? Not buying it, and if he was it's down to his own professionalism which would go against him. Nunn was talented but is pretty short on the big wins ledger and never fulfilled his promise.

I'm not sure Jones win over Ruiz, moving all the way up to Heavyweight isn't better than the Jirov win.

 

Yeah, the bottom line is Jones easily beat Toney.

I have seen a lot of arguments in this and other threads lately where guys can't argue objectively If you have to make excuses for your guy losing, you are not going to win the argument. And, you stand out as a subjective fan boy. It's a lose lose for you.

Ojectively, RJJ trashed James Toney.

RJJ>James Toney.

 

He is trying and succeeding. Don't have any illusions, you are the one coming off as a fan boy.

Toney always had trouble making weight. That was nothing new.

It wasn't news either that Nunn partied and that he had looked average against Barkley, Starling and Curry.

You can make excuses for both. But to buy the excuses for only one of the fighters marks you out as a fan boy.

 

I think these guys are overplaying Toney's weight problems against RJJ.

RJJ made a lot of fighters look slow and lethargic.

He had the hand and foot speed to box circles around Toney. Hell, Nunn was doing the same for much of their fight.
And RJJ in '94 was faster than '91 Nunn. Nunn had been slipping since the Barkley fight. He was at his absolute best from '87 through the Kalambay fight.

Toney's only hope was to lure Jones to the ropes and try to counter with something big off the ropes.

Toney never had the foot speed at any point in his career to trouble prime RJJ.

 

BTW: Toney looked fine just a few months earlier against Charles Williams, displaying great stamina to get the late rounds TKO.

The difference: the style of Williams played right into his hands. Williams continually pressed forward, allowing Toney the countering opportunities on which he thrived, without having to move his feet much.

It seems when a guy like Toney or Hearns moves up in weight, Toney after RJJ, and Hearns after Ray Leonard, it is assumed (by fan boys) that weight issues were the primary reasons for the losses. They attempt to take credit away from the winner and say "see, my guy never fought at that weight again, he must have had nothing and that's why he lost."
Couldn't it also be that they just lost their title to a guy who is now perceived as the dominant guy in the division? Of course that is also a factor for moving up. Move up and go after another title when you are now the clear #2 in your division.