is the chin of james toney better than lamotta´s or hagler´s?

I'm not so sure how I'd rate Toney's chin to that of Hagler's and Lamotta's chins but his defense is most certainly a grade "A" step up from those two.

 

No.

 

I'd have all three close.

Former MW fought Peter. Twice.

 

No, i think Haglers is better as is Lamottas and Mcalls.

Toney is a bit harder to hit whereas the others where there to be hit.

I also feel Hearns, SRR, Lennox Lewis, were better punchers than anyone Toney fought

 

What's Lennox got to do with anything?

Toney was a natural MW, same as Hagler and La Motta.

He went up to HW and took shots off much bigger guys such as Holyfield & Peter, very good case for him having a better chin than both.

 

If you look at the names at heavyweight Toney fought, it is probably superlative in a p4p sense to anyone that Hagler or Lamotta fought. Peter x2 Rahman x2 Holyfield, also ate bombs from Lebedev all night long. The majority of these fights however probably involved the use of steroids, so it does dampen the credibility of these performances and the fact that James is so hard to hit cleanly

I don't think the use of Lennox Lewis is that relevant. Well, not that it's completeley irrelevant, but had Lewis not have been stopped in the first fight, McCall had avoided the mental breakdown and collectively fought more than 7 rounds between the 2 fights I think I'd be more inclined to agree with you.

Toney is definitely up there, and p4p there may be no one to match him, however I'd tend to agree that McCall had the better chin

 

I think it is .
Not only did Hagler never fought above 160 , as opposed 2 Toney fighting @ 200+ , but also Toney fought de better opponents @ 160 .
Reggie Johnson , Michael Nunn & Mike McCallum were superior h2h fighters 2 any1 Hagler fought , while Merqui Sosa , Sanderline Williams & Dave Tiberi were at least as effective @ de w8 .

I watched Hagler vs Minter , nothing remarkable regarding neither .

Regarding LaMotta , since most do not acknowledge it , I believe that at least most of his higher profile fights were staged dis wei or inader

 

Because Mcall took clean shots from Lennox and didnt budge, and Lennox is a bigger puncher than anything Toney faced

Holyfield isnt really a big puncher and Peter is overrated

 

u r far more well in4med about Tyson , compared 2 diz non Tyson rel8ed subjects .
Was Hagler "there 2b hit" ? more than Toney was ?

and what is de purpose of your last "paragraph" really ?

 

I think you're splitting hairs.

Toney's is certainly more proven, though. He was perhaps the most demonstrably durable fighter in boxing history. No amount of weight or power, from 160 up the the big men, has ever been able to get rid of him. LaMotta can't say the same, and Hagler didn't have the same tests.

That said, it really does come to a point when we're quibbling. All three are shining examples of men of steel and grit.

 

We're talking about LaMotta, Toney & Hagler here.. all middleweights, you've just randomly decided to add McCall & Lennox for no apparent reason.. :?

For a natural MW to go up to HW and take shots from Holyfield & Peter, who CLEARLY hit harder than Middleweights, that just shows the sturdiness of Toney's beard.

 

When Toney fough Peter and Holyfield he was no longer a MW. He was a heavyweight with a bigger and thicker neck and shoulders. That helped him absorb shots from bigger men. Combine that with his defensive prowess and you have a guy that's tough to take out cleanly. A Joe Frazier type fighter would have a better chance of stopping him due to his relentless pressure. As a MW I would rate his chin up there also. Was it better than Hagler's or LaMotta's? I can't say.