GGG vs James Toney at MW

Brook exposed that Golovkin's chin is iron coated in steel, and that even when GGG throws caution to the winds and fights and I quote, a "streetfight" he's going to destroy a boxer that doesn't have adequate defence.

If Toney can't beat Sanderline Williams and Tiberi then GGG destroys his fat ass.

There's nothing to suggest that Toney can hang with a guy as skilled, relentless and hard hitting as Golovkin.

You may want to rewatch the fight then. Golovkin picked off a ton of Canelo's body punches with his arm, and since when did body punching ever bother GGG anyway?

 

If only you had been shot in 2013 ...

 

I can understand you getting annoyed. But I'm one of the people who gives him a pass for some of his fights. But that's because he had a hectic schedule, and he proved to me how good he was against other world class opposition. Psychology plays a huge part in the outcome of a fight. In fights against the likes of McCallum, Nunn, Barkley and Littles etc, he was motivated and switched on. But against lower level opposition, he underestimated them and they were just average fights for him. He says that Barkley constantly trashed talked him, and he brought a machete to the press conference. So whilst I appreciate that styles make fights, I have to believe that the versions of James who fought the likes of McCallum and Barkley etc, would have beaten the likes of Williams and Tiberi. That's my honest opinion. James beat lots of fighters who were better than those two. It's like Eubank scraping by Ray Close and Dan Schommer. But they didn't fight the versions of Eubank who fought Benn and Watson, who was fuelled by fear. I think that on his best day, James would have beaten the likes of Tiberi. GG is a tremendous fighter. And he's dominated his division. But we don't know how dominant he'd have been, had he have fought once every few months like James did. James had fought 46 fights before he fought Roy at 26.

People are now starting to give passes to GG, by saying he's on the slide, which is why he didn't comfortably beat Canelo and Jacobs. They may be right. On the other hand, any version of him might have found those fights just as hard. People may have underrated those opponents, or they may have overrated GG himself.

I don't think anybody could just assume that James would have beaten GG. It would have been a very difficult fight for him.

 

I'd say ottke was one of the few long term champs who was a clear cut case for NOT being elite.

 

I respect the above. But if what if we had a time machine and swapped their timelines? Obviously there's no right answer, but it's fun to ponder.

Let's say that James only fought 3-4 times per year, against the likes of: Rubio, Murray, Lemiuex, Monroe, Brook, Jacobs and Canelo etc.

Let's say that GG fought once every 2-3 months, fighting the likes of: Tiberi, Johnson, Williams, McCallum x 2, Sosa, Johnson and Nunn etc.

How dominant would he have looked then?

We don't know.

What we do know, is that James fought better fighters in a hectic schedule.

I would say that any elite MW of the past would have looked as dominant as GG following his same timeline.

 

GG would never have figured Roy out.

He was too unorthadox.

As great as GG is, he's easy to hit.

Roy was a phenom in his prime.

He was much faster, much harder to hit clean, he had more variation, and he too possessed one punch knockout power in either hand.

Roy would have been a big favourite.

 

Horrific post, you're wrong on every point.

 

You're coming at it from a more reasonable place, so I never mind when we have a difference of opinion. It's those predicting schoolings and knockouts drawing my ire, but I shouldn't get so annoyed at people who think Ward has more HOF credentials than Wlad, anyways lol.

This would be a good, tough fight. While I'd favor GGG, Toney always put up a fight (Tiberi was a dud performance and he got outhustled, but he had plenty of moments in the other controversial fights). Couldnt rule out him winning whatsoever.

Ultimately, when I look at Toney's best 4 opponents at 160-168, it's not out of the question he leaves with an 1-4 or 2-3 record with one other judge replaced (Roy, McCallum, Nunn, Johnson-a fight that never gets mentioned but in which he was knocked down and was fortunate to get the devision). One doesn't have to think GGG would do what Roy did to James to win, because other styles and very good fighters could do it to that version. 175 has and couple more examples, but the farther you go up, the less relevant the comparison gets.

On another note, I'd have really loved to see how a Kalambay-Toney fight would've went down.

 

Griffin was a short LHW, who was an awkward and defensive, counter puncher.

GG and Griffin share no similarities.

Roy often liked to back onto the ropes at LHW, to gain a breather and to try and counterpunch.

Why would Roy have gone there against GG?

Canelo has a better defence than Roy?

You're having a joke if you think that GG would have walked through the punches that Roy threw against Griffin before knocking him out early.

How do you even reach an opinion like that?

It's just a fantasy.

He has tough fights with Jacobs and Canelo, he's easy to hit, he marks up, but he'd have walked through Roy's shots like they were nothing and he'd have taken him out early?

No.

Take a step back.

I love GG. But Brook had his head bouncing about.

The version of Roy who took out Tate in 2 rounds would have thought it was Christmas against GG.

Stop overrating him.

 

Nunn at his best was on Canelo's level, and Mike and Roy were on a higher level.

 

NUH-UH! Y-Y-YOU'RE wrong on every point!

 

Nobody has claimed that James was the greatest ever MW.

It isn't dumb to think that he could have beaten GG.

Regarding the Tiberi fight, you have said: "If you're really special, you wouldn't have these kinds of performances during a span of 2 years"

Really?

Lots of other fighters have also experienced the same issues fighting so regularly. He was fighting once every 2 months at one stage. Don't you think it's possible that James wasn't as motivated and as sharp against Tiberi, than what he'd been when he was fighting the likes of McCallum and Nunn etc? We know that styles make fights, but Toney beat better fighters than Tiberi, and I'm sure he'd have beaten him if he'd have fought whilst fighting to his full capabilities. I've discussed this with Rock earlier. Chris Eubank was fuelled by fear against Watson and Benn, and he gave incredible performances in those fights. But he then looked like garbage against the likes of Ray Close and Dan Schommer etc. It happens.

You say that a special fighter doesn't lose to guys like Tiberi, yet you have to be special to be able to beat the likes of Nunn and McCallum.

Imagine for a second that all of the current crop of fighters had followed a similar schedule, where they'd fought 46 fights by the time they were just 26? Imagine the current crop fighting every few months. Do you honestly think they would be as dominant as what they have been? Fair enough, GG is older than what Toney was, but he's only been fighting 3 times a year. A hectic schedule simply has to take it's toll, especially if you're fighting lower level guys, that you can't always get up for. Give GG and the others a fight every 2 months, and see if they would turn out the same performances each fight.

GG is the one who's getting overrated here.

He's been hailed as this killing machine, yet he's just had 2 tough fights against Jacobs and Canelo.

If you seriously think that GG would have beaten James with ease, then you are completely ignorant.

 

Obvious troll is obvious

 

Good post.

Golovkin couldn't do what Griffin did against RJJ. Yes Griffin used the jab to back Roy up as Roy backed up in straight lines, but Griffin didn't just throw a jab to score, he used it as a feint to move Roy to the ropes. Tarver did the same when he fought Roy.

Roy as you say likes to counter off the ropes, hence why he never minded backing up to the ropes. I think he could find himself there against Golovkin, but the difference is Griffin was elusive enough with his head movement to avoid Jones Jr's counters. Golovkin wouldn't be. Roy would do what he usually does shell up against the ropes, wait for his opponent to stop throwing then rip in hard counters from the ropes. Golovkin would get lit up by Roy's hard counters from the ropes.

RJJ would beat Golovkin. Golovkin could only land 31% against Canelo, RJJ is far more elusive, Golovkin couldn't cope with the speed, defence and power of Jones.

 

I don´t personally think that GG would have beaten James with easy, it would be completely ignorant like you said. Saying Toney would beat GGG easy is even more ignorant. My point is that if you use the same reference points with Toney as fighters of today, you would end up calling him a b-level fighter like lot of people tend to do nowdays (see Lemieux, Jacobs). That is, if you struggle with journeyman you are a journeyman.

The conception that Toney is invincible at 160 against current top 5 middleweights is based on nostalgic bias and his achievements in higher weight divisions. His career is unique and he achieve a lot, but he was hardly a dominant force at MW during his peak 1989-1993. He was a top MW at some point, not a force. The fact that he fought 5 times a year is admirable even though a standard backing the day.