Come on, are you serious. First of all James should have won the 1st Peter fight. But keep in mind Toney.....a former middle weight with not much more than "respectable power' went up against a HEAVY WEIGHT POWER HOUSE. Name me another former middle weight that would have went 24 rounds with Peter, let alone winning the 1st fight
Toney at Super Middle was a thing of beauty to watch. Feint and counter, what the sport is all about. James can never be an All Time Great. Jones dusted him and he never got over it.
Well, it's true about Jones, but then again Moore was beaten three times by Ezzard Charles and he's an ATG, and Frazier was destroyed by Foreman twice and most consider him an ATG too. Sometimes these losses can be accepted if the other guy is an ATG too. In my opinion anyway.
On the sites I actually do moderate it stands for 'All Tall Grannies.' But the 'tall' isn't for height. It's for the 1920's slang for 'high.' So, what these degenerates would consider James Toney in a ranking like that, our God only knows.
He is in my opinion. He let himself down by his lack of discipline on many occasions, but I think that he deserves to be regarded as an ATG. He was a throwback fighter who fought 92 times. Any guy who fights 92 times and ends their career in their 40's, 4 divisions higher than where they were in their prime is realistically going to have accumulated a few losses. Roberto Duran was also inconsistent with his weight and his performances. And he ended his career with 19 losses. Yet he's still rightfully an ATG. And whilst I'm obviously not doing a direct comparison, they shared similarities. Roy Jones lost 9 times and he's considered by most to be an ATG. Bernard Hopkins lost 8 times and is also considered by pretty much everybody to be an ATG. Although Toney didn't have the same longevity and the same amount of professionalism and discipline as a guy like Hopkins, he achieved just as much and as an equal/superior resume. He was so talented, he could hang with top 10 HW's when he was in his late 30's. People will mention the losses to the likes of Tiberi etc, but this was a guy who fought Michael Nunn, Reggie Johnson and Mike McCallum all within a period of just 9 months. He'd had 46 fights before he'd fought Roy Jones at just 26. The older greats of the past also put in the odd Tiberi like performance when they were fighting every other month. It's happened all throughout the history of the sport. And apart from when he lost to Roy Jones, the fights he lost were more down to himself rather than where he was just beaten by guys who were superior to him. He had excellent skills, and he had top level wins across 5 divisions. I think that he did enough.
Although that highlighted his lack of professionalism and discipline, it's also a testament to his skills that he was able to do that. How many former MW's who were out of shape and in their 30's could have hung around the HW division for a prolonged period of time?
Have a word with yourself and apply some context. Give me a list of former MW's who could have beaten Sam Peter, when they were out of shape and in their late 30's. It's a testament to his skills that a big powerful, top 10-15 HW didn't brutalise him. He had no business being in with HW's. He was 5'10 former MW with a 72" reach.
How many former MW's could beat the number 1 HW? A weight class jumping opportunist? There's many guys who wouldn't have gone near the guys who Toney did.
All time greats don't get dropped 3x , go life and death and hold on for dear life against Sam Peter either. Toney outslicked and outboxed Peter in the first fight which is why they had an immediate rematch. He was old , fat and had no business at HW.
