GGG vs James Toney at 160.

Why would you even contemplate debating someone about 2 fights, when you've only seen 4 rounds from them?

It's bizarre.

 

Stiff and slow?

In serious decline?

Stop.

 

You can win eight rounds while being knocked down, which Toney arguably did, and end up with a 115-112 card. I think I had it by one point for Toney, not three, but that card was arguable. So was a Reggie win.

It was real close, kinda like GGG-Derev, Jacobs or Canelo II.

 

I agree with Jones power and speed! However with Roy's chin, he could have very well be clipped fighting the same opposition. Just playing the percentages with someone who was badly Ko'd by 1 punch and out and down for a long time vs another man. In 20 title defense, someone is landing something serious on Roy Jones.

GGG is officially 40-1-1, he should be 42-0 or 41-1. His amateur career he was amazing

" He finished his amateur career with an outstanding record of 345–5, with all his defeats being very close on points (like 8 – +8 versus Damian Austin, or 14 – 15 versus Direll ), no stoppage losses , and the majority of all losses eventually avenged within a year "

This shows amazing skills. As a pro he was very consistent too.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gennady_Golovkin[/url]

 

McCullum says he was past his best. I dont think he made much in this fight either.

Watch McCallum in his prime 6 year ago, you'll see a big difference. Then watch him vs Toney. Fair enough?

 

While this is partly true, I'd just like to say that Hagler's best wins (outside of Hearns), were genuine middleweights and damn good fighters. Vito, Roldan, Hart, Hamsho, Briscoe and of course, the Sibson/Minter/Finnegan trio of Brits, were all damn good fighters and all well suited to 160. Roldan was actually huge for 160 IMO.

Monzon was a big MW himself, so yeah, he had size advantages over Valdez & Briscoe, but those two were real middleweights too. Just smaller than Moznon. Mundine was a real middleweight. Griffith was an ATG middleweight and welterweight. It was only Napoles who was significantly smaller, or not great at 160.

 

We have evidence to prove that he wasn't past it.

Toney had just beaten Reggie and Nunn.

Mike had just beaten Kalambay and Watson.

Watson beat Benn and almost beat Eubank.

After Toney had struggled with Mike, he went on to ice a guy like Tim Littles, who'd beaten Frankie Liles.

All the evidence points to the fact that although he was past his peak, Mike was still an elite level fighter at 35.

You like to quote numbers, so go and look at the names.

Look at who they all fought at the time. Look at who they fought afterwards.

Mike wasn't past it.

He aged like Floyd and Bernard did.

 

Which point or round do you disagree with. I put it out there, I have not see one person say it wasn't accurate. How many GGG fights have you seen? The point is I can say the same to anyone. Right not Toney vs McCallum is fresh in my mind, fresher than most as they have not seen what I have in a while.

 

Even the stats - somewhat ironically - support that case.

 

'It's not unusual...'

So sayeth the lord, Tom Jones.


(for certain posters about certain boxers, at least)

 

At that age Toney beat Jirov and Holyfield with less controversy.

 

Yes.

Now apply CONTEXT.

GG struggled with Jacobs and Canelo.

Mike fought Roy Jones at 39 years of age up at LHW.

Now please tell me, in your honest opinion, what you would think would have happened if TODAY'S version of GG moved up 2 divisions to fight a 27 year old version of Roy Jones.

Please lets read your thoughts on such a match up.

Regarding the Ring ratings, I've already told you that ALL of Mike's best opposition were rated in the top 10 at the time.

Toney's best opponents were also rated in the top 10, across various weights, all throughout his career.

 

Look man, this is you:

"It's an excuse to say that Toney wasn't ready and 100% for Tiberi and Williams"

This is also you:

"GG wasn't at his best against Canelo and Jacobs"

 

Back in the real world, GG couldn't crumple up Canelo, Derv and Jacobs.

Back in the real world, NOBODY ever crumpled up Mike McCallum, not even a prime version of Roy, even when Mike was 4 weight classes up and approaching 40 years of age.

The same logic applies to Canelo.

It's just fantasy talk.

 

But he applies double standards all the time. It is impossible to have a fair and objective debate with this guy.