Close call. Benitez had a higher ceiling but burned out quickly. Toney had the longevity. Wilfred Benitez wins: Kid Pambele, Carlos Palomino, Bruce Curry (x2), Maurice Hope, Roberto Duran James Toney wins: Michael Nunn, Reggie Johnson, Mike McCallum (x2), Iran Barkley, Vasily Jirov, Evander Holyfield
This, and he fought his wins to me were more iconic and his youngest title win and Duran also and Cervantes, and he fought Hearns and Leonard when they were good.. Hearns was not yet prime, but at his prime weight.
Wilfredo Benitez was greater. He beat Cervantes and Palomino to win titles at a young age. Was able to win the title at Jr.Middleweight and school a Duran who was in great shape.
Benitez faced 2 PRIME atg's and came up short. But those two performances are better than Toney's victories over a past prime M.Mccallum x2, a deep in the valley past it Holyfield two fighters he matched up well against in Jirov and Barkley and his win over Nunn which he was losing unanimously until he landed a desperation punch. Motivated Benitez wins over Cervantes , Palomino and Duran are better than any of Toney's wins. Benitez was much more naturally gifted, Toney though as he demonstrated probably worked harder in the gym at least at some point of his career because his skill level were top notch. Toney knew how to fight. He had the perfect style to have a long career and go up in weight successfully with his economical punching, and well timed counters . Benitez the more naturally gifted fighter is only a tad bit better than Toney in my opinion. But I wouldn't argue with anyone who see it a different way based on Toney's longevity and ability to fight successfully all the way up to heavyweight. But Toney's lack of motivation in being at top physical condition and seeming to coast a lot of times in the ring is the main reason I lean to Benitez.
no way. Toney did not get lucky with a desperation punch as you say. James was coming on strong and had won rounds 8 - 10 and you could see Mike wilting from the pressure just before James tagged him This is a much bigger win than a fat uninspired Duran, or a so so Mo Hope; no mobility, zero foot movement. Palomino is average at best and Cervantes was quite slow. Tall, but no speed whereas Mike was a difficult leftie, WITH speed, movement, and a punch To me, that win trumps ALL of Wilfred's big wins Notice how Wilfred could NOT overcome those fighters WITH speed like Hearns & Leonard case closed
Duran wasn't fat. He had trained well for Benitez. Cervantes was a great fighter. Palomino 7lbs north was certainly above average and brought pressure, infighting and body punching as Stracey found out.
dont get me wrong. They are good quality wins, even impressive wins in their own right The win over Duran is seen as a mild upset whereas Toney's win over Nunn was a monumental win I will take wins over Nunn & McCallum over Palomino, out of his weight class, immobile, Duran and Cervantes any day
You only stated your opinion. Mine is a little different. This isn't a court of law, only different points of view. If the case is closed as you say it's only because your ego won't allow you to see that different point of view . Your answers are the only one that matter to you( which is ok) but why be on the site if you have all the answers? Calling Duran fat the night he fought Benitez is complete nonsense, and indicates more about your one sided view and only to enhance your argument. Benitez had a better showing against Leonard and Hearns than Toney had against Jones Jr. The only prime ATG he faced. So who had the bigger issue with speed? But as I wrote in my previous post I wouldn't have an issue with anyone who thought Toney was better.
I dont have all the answers but James nailed Nunn clean all the way back to the 5th round and was seen slumping into the ropes just before the end. There is no way he won that fight simply on a desperation punch Duran: he was no longer the sleek, trim fighting machine of 135 no offense but he wasnt even close to wat he was in 1980 when he fought Leonard & Palomino
Of course he wasn't what he was at welterweight and light. But that version was damn good. Some seem to forget a couple fights after the loss to Benitez Duran would go on to finish off Cuevas and absolutely ruin young up and comer Moore, who was a big favorite to beat him. After those two fights he would be the only fighter to extend a prime Hagler. Hagler had to really bring it the last few rds of their fight to get a win over Duran. So was he really that far over the hill as some suggest, or was Benitez better than some like to give credit? To me, it's the same old Duran "wasn't "Excuses made whenever he lost in his prime or close to it. You know the ones, wasn't feeling well. ( Leonard) wasn't ready to fight because he was out partying ( Hearns and Benitez) Wasn't taking him seriously ( DeJesus and Laing) wasn't big enough for Hagler( which is true in my opinion) Benitez doesn't get the credit deserved for that victory. He beat Duran more convincingly than Hagler or Leonard in their 2nd fight. And Duran definitely wasn't as past it as badly as Holyfield the night he faced Toney. May not have been as past it as the versions of McCallum he faced.