James Toney: A Critical Analysis

No he was getting heavily criticised to the point of written off as a potential great by the time he fought Toney.The barkley, starling and CUrry efforts were widely derided.

Ironically enough he looked the best he had in a while for 5-6 rounds against Toney, but his stamina was terrible, and the slop and tecnical flaws that were always there under the surface and coming increasingly to the fore as his training habits got worse did him in.Standing in front of Toney inviting punishment with his head up in the air like a pez dispenser and too tired to slip the shots anymore.

 

btw i don't mean to totally downplay the win.

Nunn was obviously still a tough fighter to beat and it was a top result for a young Toney who was given little chance.I just think the belief of Nunn being a beast at the top of his game needs to be dispelled.

 

First of all I'd like to applaud the OP for his drunk posting. We see far too little of that here these days, and it always makes for rousing commentary and rebuttal. Well played, squire.

Toney never fought any of those contemporaries because he was a big fatty who was so weight drained by making 160 that beating people like Glenn Wolfe and Dave Tiberi became a chore. No reason other than a total lack of self-discipline, but it is what it was.

 

Ruined his reputation is surely a bit of exaggeration? Number 1 unbeaten linear MW champ standing at 6'3, fast as lightening and what was he top 3 P4P? He might have had his critics but didn't Monzon?

I suppose an interesting question would be, what if not for Toney who would have knocked Nunn off his perch? Nunn-McCallum I'd probably fancy McCallum but not a given. Or Eubank/Benn/Jackson/Watson/Graham for that matter? I think he beats them all with Eubank maybe having a championship round chance like Toney and maybe Watson and Graham could box with Nunn.

Possibly I'd favour him but it would happen in what '92 so you have to start favouring Toney then I think

 

PP, I know you're a big fan of both Toney and McCallum, but curious as to who you think is the greater of the two?

 

Toney beat him at the end of 91.

He was built up as a protected prospect, but had already lost his Euro middle title and unbeaten record to kalambay at the start of 1990.Then did nothing after that but fight some journeymen for a couple of years and be given a title shot.

Kalambay had fought McCallum again and had a few euro title fights in that period.It's not a huge deal, but he was worth another challenge and Del'aquila getting moved into a shot was bull****.Toney vs kalambay instead of vs aquila or tiberi would have been better for the fans.

 

Pretty close but I'd go with McCallum overall, Toney has more natural talent and is certainly flashier but McCallum is the ultimate 12-15 round fighter using his smarts and efficiency combined with great conditioning to be incredibly effective. McCallum, Kalambay aside was so consistent, where as Toney not quite as consistent. Both have very impressive longevity, both have a heap of excellent underrated wins, both are at a very high level, McCallum's level based on the fact he was past his best against Toney slightly above.

Just imo though I wouldn't argue too much with someone picking Toney, overall quite the contrast, McCallum made everything of his talent, where as Toney winged it on talent and skill never being the best he could be.