James toney at hw versus second coming of big George?

and Foreman went life and death with Alex Stewart.

 

You sound a little upset. He stopped a top five heavyweight and champion.

 

I didn't know Toney was a 6'3 hard punching guy who used lateral movement.

 

Funny how you commonly interpret the provision of context as 'upset' on the part of the provider.

It perhaps speaks to why you often seek to ignore context and project your upset about the same onto others.

On paper, yes. But Maskaev didn't compete for the whole of 2007. He was old, ring rusty, in his first bout since being out, due to injury, and had been beaten more emphatically, when much closer to his prime, by other, modestly talented Heavyweights.

Peter's win here was comparatively unimpressive and, irrespective of Oleg's favorable positioning in the ratings, he really wasn't anyone of note.

 

He only did in the 2nd fight.........that was an unexpected anomaly. Toney definitely should've won the first fight though

I don't think Toney could beat old Foreman.

I don't think Toney gets hit with anything clean all fight, but he's gonna get clubbed over and over again and moved around. And one of Foreman's best tactics is how he hits and will shove an opponent off balance and off center so there's no counter shot coming back at him. Toney has nothing that will trouble him, George can punch slightly after Toney and his shot will still land because of the strength and momentum of his punch. George UD12

 

I’m gonna say George wins a decision. Can’t see either of these guys stopping the other but I’m picture Foreman keeping toney on the defensive

 

The point was Toney was better than Stewart. You overplay the Peter card and have been called out on it by quite a few posters. It is really hard to picture old Foreman just walking through against the sophisticated, skilled and tough Toney like you want us all to believe.

 

https://www.boxing247.com/weblog/archives/118275

Peter wasn’t regarded as joke like mid 90s Foreman, so that would definitely play a role in betting lines.

 

Wlad had already been knocked out by Sanders, Foreman looked really intense v Norton and Frazier and set Moorer up nicely for the KO, he was a smarter finisher than Peter and beat better fighters.

 

No offense, Mark, but everything you're saying here has nothing to do with what I wrote about.

 

Prime Hoylfield and Moorer were better than Toney.

The Foreman who fought Hoylfield and Moorer was much better than the one who fought Stewart. And Toney didn't fight anything like Stewart. Who are the "quite a few posters" other than yourself lol? Multiple people agreed with me and you're the only one arguing.

 

This looks about perfect.
I fairly rarely comment before reading & considering all comments, but this is how I felt.
Toney with gaining mucho weight-& PEDs-had some success at HW.
But even so he was never approaching a modern HWs size, & he had to sacrafice speed & endurance & was never a high volume puncher even before gaining all the weight.

There is also a minority chance that Foreman stops him.
Holyfield was tiring more than Foreman-although finishing well, he was getting exhausted-Toney just was not the quality of HW a prime Evander was. Great as he was so much lighter.
Or even a prime Morrison.

He would also not be able to be as evasive as Tommy was with all the extra weight.
Even though in theory a boxing style like his would be an advantage against the slugger, it would not be enough.

 

I am not sure how the betting odds for Peter bolster a view of Maskaev as a credible titlist. It does the opposite from where I am sitting. Peter subsequently beating Maskaev (in laborious fashion) does not put him on a par with Foreman, let alone provide a basis for believing Peter was superior in any way.

Mid-90s Foreman regained the lineal Heavyweight World Championship, so I am not sure why anyone would regard him as a joke by then. Indeed, he had begun to be taken more seriously after starching Cooney ('90) and reinforced this view by giving prime Holyfield ('91) one of his toughest tests.

That Foreman's subsequent accomplishment came against the odds is only a credit to him. Anyone thinking Foreman was a joke after beating Moorer ('94) should not themselves be taken seriously.

 

He beat Moorer while losing badly, didn't give a rematch, and did nothing noteworthy after the fight.

Moorer is arguably the worst lineal heavyweight champion of my lifetime other than George himself.

 

In my opinion "Life and death" from Peter 1 is a huge exaggeration. Toney from the Peter fight was also already shot and obese compared to the peak of Toneys heavyweight campaign so shouldn't be the version used in a fantasy matchup