You said that he was outboxed by 7 people. And the only reason you have changed it to 6, is because I pointed it out. Otherwise, you’d still be claiming 7. It wasn’t a typo. You said 7 because you pulled his record and you saw the number 7 next to his losses. You have exposed and embarrassed yourself. Again, everyone knows that you debate through Boxrec, but this was 100% confirmation. As for your questions, why don’t you go and watch some of his fights. He was better than his record suggests. And many people believe that he shouldn’t have lost 7 fights. You yourself are one of them. You think that he did enough to beat Toney. And you think that Toney is a top 25 MW. So that shows you how good he was. You can also watch the highly controversial Jorge Castro fights. Regarding his fight with Toney, it was just a bad stylistic match up for him. No excuses. Regarding a fantasy fight with GG, again, GG absolutely could have beaten him. But it would have been stupid to have written off Reggie completely, just on the grounds that that he lost 7 times.
Ha! You’re not up for a film review. James Toney was getting thoroughly outboxed by Michael Nunn. But he kept pressuring him and cutting off the ring. He then started landing great shots to the body where he slowed Nunn down in the second half of the fight before eventually stopping him. Yet you won’t give Toney an ounce of credit for the win. You won’t give credit to a novice for knocking out a top 3 P4P fighter. You won’t study the film and see where Toney started turning things in his favour from the 7th round. All you can muster is: “Toney swung for the fences” You aren’t even man enough to give the guy credit for beating an extremely talented southpaw with a huge reach. As for facts, you only want to quote them when they suit your agenda. And as soon as they don’t, you just deem them completely irrelevant. All in all, you’re a terrible poster.
Both you and BCS8 would have had more credibility if you’d have said that Nunn had schooled Toney for the first half of the fight. It still would have been an exaggeration, but it wouldn’t have been anywhere near as bad. I’ve seen the fight numerous times, and yes, I had Nunn well ahead. I haven’t got an issue with that. Again, my issues are as follows: 1. BCS8 saying that Toney was schooled before he gassed. 2. BCS8 saying that Nunn was 6-4 ahead. Do you not understand that he contradicted himself and that it can’t have been both? If Nunn had schooled Toney before he was knocked out, then he’d have been 10 rounds up. If in his opinion, Toney won 4 rounds, then he CAN’T have been schooled before the knockout. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have won the 4 rounds would he? Pretty simple stuff. He obviously exaggerated what happened but just won’t back down. Also, it’s completely disingenuous just to say that Nunn gassed. Because it was Toney’s pressure and body work which helped to slow him down. To not give Toney any credit for that win is completely ignorant.
I’ve just read up to the end of the thread. I don’t know if you have, but BC8S has provided 3 more stunning WTF type gems which can be added shortly. I read his posts on my lunch break today and literally burst out laughing. The gift that keeps on giving.
I’m not interested in the official scorecards. The fight happened almost 30 years ago. I’ve seen it numerous times. I know what the official cards were. What I want to know, is why YOU gave Toney 4 rounds? Nobody else has said that. You have said that. You have dug yourself a hole which you can’t get out of. And just repeating “Toney got schooled” like a small child sticking his fingers in it’s ears shouting “I’m not listening” isn’t enough. Again, if Toney was being completely schooled UNTIL the 11th round, where did he get the 4 rounds from?? If what you said was true, he’d have been 10 rounds down. At the start of the thread, you said that he was being schooled until Nunn gassed. You then came back and said he was down 6-4 or maybe 7-3. You completely contradicted yourself, and it cannot be both. A man who’s schooled until the 11th round does not accumulate 4 rounds. The other thing is, I’ve repeatedly told you that Toney cut off the ring and pressured him, where he threw great body shots which started to turn things in his favour. He was well down on the cards but he started to break him down in the second half of the fight. He didn’t just win by a lucky punch in the 11th. The tide had turned. I have repeatedly told you this, yet all you could offer in return was a smiley emoji. If you disagree with what I’ve written, then you haven’t watched the fight, pure and simple. Like Mendoza, you’re not man enough to give Toney credit for the win. Nunn was a huge southpaw who was a top 3, P4P fighter at the time. Toney was a novice and a huge underdog. He broke him down and knocked him out. Yet you give him zero credit for the win. Nothing. Yet when GG knocks out B and C class guys like Macklin etc, you reach for the lotion and the tissues. You aren’t even a fan of the sport. Just a joke poster to ridicule for entertainment.
Its a Matter of Styles - I think 3G gets hit more that McCallum would but he gets to James - James didn't really impress me at 160 but showed his greatness later in higher weights- At 160 3G was too tough
BCS8, The gift that keeps on giving. He didn’t allow any fighters to be great? So if they hadn’t have fought him, guys like Macklin, Geale, Murray and Monroe etc, could all have been great? He crushed them like bugs? He sure did. But they were low level fighters. Toney did struggle more. But again, he fought better opponents and he had far more fights. Guys like McCallum and Nunn were on another level to the guys who GG fought in his prime. I’ve watched the fight. I have no issue with anyone thinking that Mike won. He struggled with a guy who wasn’t as good as the version of Toney who Mike fought. I’m literally at a point where I don’t know what you’re going to come out with next. Danny Jacobs would have DESTROYED Mike McCallum? WTF? And how much LSD have you consumed today? What is your fantasy based upon? Nobody blasted Mike away. Not even a 27 year old version of Roy Jones, when Mike was 40 years old up at LHW. You really are an entertainer. Mike beat Watson, Graham, Kalambay, Collins and in your opinion, Toney. What has Danny Jacobs done in comparison? He’s beaten Quillin, Truax, Mora and Chavez. PLEASE start a thread. Jacobs has done NOTHING to have been favoured over Mike McCallum, and if you think that he’d have crushed him, then you shouldn’t be left alone for your own safety. He hasn’t. He never beat any great fighters in his prime, and he struggled with non great fighters past his prime. Do you want to compare the names? We can do it either just at MW or overall. Either way he’ll lose. Mike McCallum has a better resume. It’s a FACT that GG fought less fights. It’s a FACT that that GG fought in less divisions. You just can’t help yourself can you? Just when I think that you can’t possibly type anything as stupid as your previous comments, you go and surpass yourself. GG would have trashed Steve Collins, Sumbu Kalambay, Michael Watson, Herol Graham and James Toney? Who has GG ever beaten with Kakambay’s technical skills? Which southpaw has he ever fought that was comparable to Graham? Which fighter has he beat who was as good as the version of Toney who fought McCallum? It’s all a fantasy. GG beat nobody in his prime better than those guys. Past prime, he struggled with Jacobs, Canelo and Derev. Let’s hope that nobody tells you that Santa’s not real in a few months.
Dino, please keep updating this. We’ll have a right laugh when it gets to 100 pages. I’ve started to really like these guys. Just for the sheer entertainment. You can now add the 3 following gems to your list: 1. GG stopped his opponents from being great. 2. Danny Jacobs would have DESTROYED Mike McCallum. 3. GG would have TRASHED McCallum’s MW opponents, including James Toney. Priceless.
Mendoza, Get real. Compromised by saying that I wasn’t knowledgeable on Ken Overlin? You didn’t even know how many guys Reggie Johnson had lost to. I said that GG would have done a better job than Toney had he have been at his best, BUT under the same circumstances I couldn’t be sure. Learn to read. I never mentioned McCallum. I said that Toney would have produced better results if HE had been at his best. Billy Joe Saunders was in his prime against Artur Akavov. Being in your prime and being at your best aren’t always the same. You said yourself that Saunders was unfocused against Akavov. Get real man. You have embarrassed yourself for 70 pages. You only quote facts when it suits. I’m not in your league for boxing knowledge? Ha! BCS8 has obviously shared some of his LSD with you over the weekend. I exposed you as a Boxrec warrior which you’ll never live down. Your comment on Reggie Johnson was absolutely cringeworthy. Guess what genius? Hopkins lost more fights than what McCallum did. Here you are saying that Mike couldn’t have beaten GG because he lost 5 times, yet on the Toney-Hopkins thread, you’ve said that Hopkins could have beaten GG, despite the fact that he lost 8 times! Ha! Again, you only apply context when it suits. Hopkins lost to the best guys who he fought. And McCallum has a BETTER MW resume with the better wins, especially if you think that he beat Toney. One moment you’re saying that you possess more knowledge than me, and then the next you post up this dumb question. The answer is: Because Hopkins spent THIRTEEN YEARS at the weight, where he fought lesser opponents. Was Sven Ottke a better SMW than Roy Jones because he had more SMW title defences? We’ve already covered this numerous times. Yes, styles make fights. Which is why I've told you that it would have been foolish to have written Reggie Johnson off against GG, just based upon his Boxrec listing. I would never even dream of scoring a fight with you. And I don’t mind if you had Johnson ahead. But again, don’t tell me that Reggie beat James but then scoff at the thought of Reggie beating GG, just on the grounds that he lost 7 times. You’ve just asked me why Hopkins had more title defences at MW. Absolute BS. Get real. Again, you’ve laughed that Reggie could have beaten GG because he lost 7 times. Again, you’ve said that Mike couldn’t have beaten GG because he lost 5 times, yet that Hopkins could have done, despite the fact that he lost 8 times. You say that Toney couldn’t have beaten GG because he struggled with Williams and lost to Tiberi. Yet that Hopkins could have, despite him losing to a nobody on his debut and struggling with Mercado. You use McCallum’s defeats against him that happened when he was literally 40 years old up at LHW and CW. You don’t know how to debate. It’s simply beyond you. No. We’re doing the laughing. You can’t bury anybody. Give me your address. I’ll buy you a signed photograph of Dave Tiberi for Christmas. THE NUNN WIN. I wasn’t talking about Tiberi. You are OBSESSED with that man. Why can’t you give him credit for the NUNN WIN?? If Boxrec was shut down, this thread would only have 20 pages in it. You corrected yourself on Reggie Johnson ONLY AFTER I’D EXPOSED YOU. Come back with something of substance for me to debate.
Look at your last paragraph. This is what you have said: “Tiberi couldn’t punch and had an inflated type record” Okay. It’s true. So: Tiberi beat Toney. Toney admits that. However, Toney beat lots of other very good-great fighters. Please absorb the above information. Has it sunk in yet? Now kindly tell me after taking the above into account, why it’s an excuse to say that Toney wasn’t at his best? Now if you think that Toney WAS at his best against Tiberi, then please answer the following question: If Toney was at his best for Tiberi, then HOW was he able to beat all of the other very good-great fighters who he beat?? Thanks.
Tiberi had everything to gain and nothing to lose. He’d had a 7 month break since his last fight. He was motivated to fight for the title. His circumstances were completely different to Toney’s.
You didn't see that fight when it happened. You didn't see the McCallum fights until a few weeks ago.
Funny how the scores are relevant when it's Toney getting the W over Tiberi, Johnson and McCallum. If we can ignore the scores now, then I arbitrarily declare Toney as being unable to carry Golovkin's shoes at MW, having three losses to the abovementioned fighters, Holy crap. Loudon can count to 30!! Colour me impressed. I thought that 13-15 would have been his ceiling. Sure you watched the right fight? I'm guessing that you have Tyson-Douglas stuck on loop in the Betamax. Doesn't seem like it. Here they are: Official Judging Bob Watson 99 - 91 Dalby Shirley 98 - 92 Gary Merritt 97 - 93 Since you are a senile old fart that can't follow an argument nor remember what was said, I'll repeat it: I was being generous. In other words, if you scrape together any possible doubt and put it in Toney's favour, you could find 4 rounds with biased scoring. But I fully expect a numbskull of your magnitude to start crying about this aga People say that dementia turns the clock back in terms of mental faculties, and I'm beginning to see why with regard to you. Nope, and yep. Cool story bro If you disagree with what I said, then you simply haven't watched the fight. I gave Toney plenty of credit for getting beaten like a tambourine until Nunn gassed. The stories of Nunn make some terrifying reading in the Loudon version of the Brothers Grimm Fairytale omnibus. And yet there are nitwits that have this novice taking out Golovkin In the same breath these same nitwits proclaim Toney as a mighty force at 160 AND a NOVICE. OMG how can you have both positions at the same time? You have completely contradicted yourself!! OMG OMG I give Toney credit for hanging in there getting smashed until Nunn got tired. ^Opinion You're clearly a fan of sniffing James Toney's used undies. You're a demented old bat with a Toney fan complex that borders on Dino's hatred for the Klitschkos. I've noticed that the moment any casually passing poster drops in on the subject with even a mildly pro-Golovkin post you immediately reply with a huge screed about how they are wrong. You are monomanic on the subject and clearly need some kind of psychiatric help.
Certainly they would be more highly regarded than they are now. You're such a Toney fanboy and obsessive maniac that you don't seem to realise that his reputation hinges on him getting every close decision in his favour as well as a couple of gifts. Martin Murray could, with Toney's luck, have easily had decisions over Sturm, Martinez and Abraham. Subtract the Golovkin loss and you're looking at the resume of a top of the line fighter. All opinion, and he did not have more fights than GGG at 160. You think they were on another level because Toney beat them. Your fanboyism is so apparent. You need to watch more fight footage, and then you'll understand why. Or, rather, you won't since you are so biased. So you are again referencing other weightclasses after you just about had a hernia earlier? Classy work. We're talking about the Toney version, dimwit. You're just a boxrec warrior. We're talking about 2 specific versions, numbskull. We're talking about 160, dullard. What is the relevance of that to 160, pinhead? Your stupidity is impetuous, your pigheadedness impregnable. Yep. Almost as fantastical as the narrative that you spin in your head. Please tell them to up the dose of morphine at the old age home.
