Who was better? James Toney or Mike Mccallum

Sorry but if you think Charles or Barkley is even remotely close to any of the 6 guys I mentioned then you simply can't be reasoned with. Not to mention the fact that Williams was fought Toney at 168 a division he hadn't fought in well over a decade

Lol but before I give up on you please explain to me how "Kalambay was struggling in his career"? He lost 1 fight in between their fights to Nunn and even after losing the rematch would go on to get arguably the 2nd and 3rd beat wins of his career over Collins and a more definitive win over Graham in the rematch

 

It's close but I'd lean toward McCallum.

I don't understand why you left off Julian Jackson and Ayube Kalule under McCallum's list, but included Doug DeWitt? McCallum didn't fight DeWitt. Jackson was a two-division champ and an all-timer.

They are both three division champs. McCallum won titles from super welter to light heavyweight. Toney won from middle to cruiser.

Also, Nunn wasn't #1 pound-for-pound at the time Toney fought him. Nunn was never #1 pound-for-pound as far as I can remember. Whitaker and Chavez were always higher than him. In fact, Toney needed a knockout to win when he knocked Nunn out. (Credit to him for doing it. But he was WAY behind on the cards.)

And Jirov was NEVER the LINEAL cruiserweight champ. I have no idea where you got that. That's just plain wrong. It was a good win. But Jirov wasn't the lineal champ.

And if we based it on whose career I'd rather have had, I'd have to go with McCallum, too. Listening to them today, McCallum seems fine. You can barely understand what Toney is saying.

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

We were so close to another 4 kings with McCallum-Jones-Toney-Hopkins. If only McCallum wasn't a little older and had fought Hopkins. I still want a George Kimble style book on them. Hell, do one on Griffith-Rodriguez-Monzon-Benvenuti as well. Love when you see a nice group of HOF caliber fighters get the chance to square off over the course of their careers.

As for ranking them, who cares. Both were aesthetically and technically incredible. Both became champions in at least 3 weight classes. Their trilogy of fights are masterful. Was nice to see Body Snatcher ringside for the Haney's fight last weekend.

 

Extremely close for all the reasons mentioned above. I'll say Toney by a slim margin. But I preferd to watch McCallum..

 

Too close to call for me. Both ATGs, top tier boxers with skills and a nice style to watch. McCallum was more consistent, more crafty and versatile but less athletically gifted while Toney was the more naturally gifted and talented boxer but less disciplined but still skilled enough to keep moving up in weight. I think Toney's victories over McCallum, plus his weight climb edges it for me.

 

I’d been meaning to re-watch some McCallum for ages and thanks to this thread I popped a couple fights in last night. The Graham and Collins fights. Even then a little bit past his best and as a middleweight facing much younger opponents he’s fantastic in those fights and against two styles that couldn’t be any different.

He really was a joy to watch.

 

They were both tremendously skilled, but I don't see an argument for Toney here. Wildly inconsistent, and professionalism and consistency are part of the equation. You have to include that. McCallum does not struggle with Dave Tiberi. He does not lose to Drake Thadzi or Montell Griffin.

 

Mike does win against the likes of Holyfield or Peter or Ruiz or Jirov
It is hard to see an argument for Mike based on resume, not to mention that he lost twice against Toney

 

I didn't forget Julian Jackson, meant to put him on the list and whether Jirov was lineal champ I got that wrong but he was the no.1 at CW and considering Toney started his career at MW and had spent close to 8 years in the wilderness after the loss to Roy Jones that was one hell of a win.

Nunn was #3 P4P (Ring mag) when Toney beat him, not #1 you're right but when you consider he was only behind Whitaker and Chavez still a great win.

Regarding Toney's slurred speech that's because of his attitude towards sparring not professional fights, JT went all out in sparring just watch any clip and it's full on intensity no punches at 60%, if JT had had a sensible mindset in sparring I doubt he'd be talking like he is now.

 

In the ruiz fight, Toney was barely in shape and still beat his ass.Peter got outboxed in that first fight.

 

At which point McCallum was pushing 40. Besides, head-to-head results are proof of nothing. By that logic, Norton was a better fighter than Ali since most would agree Ken got by far the better of it in their trilogy. It doesn't work like that.

 

if you think mike was pushing 40 when he fought JT, you better check your facts.Mike was 35 in the first two Toney fights.I think skill wise both are about even.Resume wise, James edges for me because of what he did at heavyweight.

 

Tough one. Toney has the single biggest win (Nunn) and also bigger achievements in what he did as a CW and HW, but he had also much lower lows.

Should have lost to Tiberi, lost twice against Griffin (although probably at least one should have gone his way), Thadzi and was badly schooled by Jones. Even an ancient McCallum did better against Roy than peak Toney. The one time Mike really let himself down was against Kalambay, but he got to give a much better account of himself in the rematch even though it was a close win.

As for the fights between them, Toney probably shaded the first, but the second should have gone to Mike for me. The third doesn't really matter since Mike was so far past it by then. So it comes down to whether you think Toney was more green than Mike was old for the first two or the other way around.

So all in all, it's hard to say. I feel inclined to give the nod to Mike since I don't think he struggled with any style as Toney did with guys with quick feet. Kalambay, yes, but he largely redeemed himself.

 

I know what Boxrec may say, and I also know how old he was rumored to be even further back than that, so believe what you will about his age. It's always been up for dispute, and 35 is old even if it WAS accurate.

 

Toney was 34 when he beat Jirov and 35 when he beat Holyfield.2 of his best career wins,