Depending on your criteria, if you're basing it on natural skill level etc then you could put him as your #1 SMW, but in terms of actual historical achievement & accomplishment at the weight? No. He only had a handful of fights, one of which was against a former Lightweight.
He’s number 1 on a H2H basis, in terms of ability. The version of Roy who beat James Toney at 25, was on another level to Joe and anybody else who fought there.
Kessler or froch wouldn't of layed the same amount of leather on lacy, both have a hard fight Infront of them with lacy, different style totally
More often than not, stand out amateurs become stand out champions as a pro, Loma Usyk, Golovkin to name a few
Joe Calzaghe was more bothered in protecting the 0 than mixing it with the best of the best on a consistent basis.
There's far more that never amounted to anything but that's besides the point. I'm merely stating that the record itself doesn't mean all that much. Amateur experience is great. I'm just not impressed by hugely inflated win loss ratios
But not on actual achievement he shouldn't be. Ye he beat Toney but u know yourself how notorious Toneys weight issues were & how inconsistent (performance wise) he could be from fight to fight. I don't think a win over Toney over rides the years of success at SMW that men like Calzaghe & Ward had.. consider it like this, Griffin beat Toney twice at LHW, i don't think most people would rank Griffin over men like Kovalev or Dariusz tho, dominant champions for a sustained period.. beating Toney doesn't give you an automatic claim to be the best fighter at a weight
