James Toney vs Billy Joe Saunders @160

Another point

If you look at it like that and consider Toney was starting that run at fight 27 onwards.

Saunders faced in back to back fights -
- undefeated O'Sullivan now WBA-NABA and WBO int cont champ and just beaten A Douglas
- undefeated Ryder as whos just beaten P Nielsen
- undefeated Blandamura now MW European champ
- undefeated Eubank Jnr now IBO SMW champ challenging for the WBA SMW title next

That was fights 18, 19, 20 and 21

Now I know that none are what you would call world champs and im not trying to say they are. the point is that they werent at the level they are now when those fights happened.

Its an example

Saunders has at this time fought at a higher level than Toney in their first respective 26 fights

 

Toney clear bummage

 

When he was drawing with S Williams?

 

Why do you think your 26 fight scenario is so important?

James Toney had 35 amateur fights, and BJ Saunders had over 50 amateur fights. In less fights combined James Toney became a better MW than Saunders when he beat Nunn to become IBF MW champ.

Also;

James Toney beat and dethroned reigning IBF MW champion Michael Nunn at age 22 on his 27th pro fight.
BJ Saunders beat his first world level contender David Lemieux recently at age 28 on his 26th pro fight.

So tell me how great those first 26 fights make BJ Saunders...

I'll take Toney's win over champion Michael Nunn at a young age of 22 on his 27th pro fight over BJ Saunder's entire resume and his biggest win over MW contender David Lemieux at age 28 on his 26th fight.

Toney > Saunders

 

Well this isn't right, I'm starting to agree with you a lot more these days..


I think I might be ill.

 

Brilliant!

I love it.

Who was the poster?

 

I think you may have come down with a case of common-sensealitis

Hope you don't get better lol

 

Ha!

You know you're one of my favourite posters.

This thread had died off before you came back and revived it with your snippet from BoxRec.


I love these types of debate where you roll out the stats.

Nobody can spin them like you do.


On a serious note:

If you compare their first 26 fights, Billy comes out on top.

If you compare them both at 28 years old, James comes out on top.


In any fantasy fight, the fairest thing to do, is to put forward a logical opinion based upon both fighters being 100% fit, fighting to their full capabilities.

As it stands, James was more proven at the weight. Which means that there's more evidence to look at.

If you don't think it's fair for people to choose James at this stage because Billy's career looks as though it's about to peak, then come back and comment further down the line in a few years time.


In my opinion, James would have to be favoured at this stage.

Now I don't have any issue with anyone who thinks Billy would have beaten him, as long as someone puts forward a well thought out opinion that's based upon logic. That's all I ask.


As far as I'm concerned, anyone who favours Billy based upon the thinking of "James lost to Tiberi, Billy is better than Tiberi, therfore Billy would have won" just wants a damn good slapping.

 

We can only hope that his career follows a similar path to James' where he goes on to fight Jacobs, Canelo and GG in his next 3-4 fights.

 

Behave.

Otherwise we're bringing up Artur Akavov.

 

Errr.. thank you

 

In a few years' time people will look back on this thrrad and shake their heads. BJS will have been put on his ass by one of the Charlos and he will be forgotten.

Fat Toney, his granite chin, comedic ramblings and love for Burger King will never cease to exist. In addition he had one punch KO power, throwback boxing skills and balls of steel.

 

I think it's worth noting that Johnson hadnt beaten a single top 10 middleweight going in to that fight, and a lot of people had him beating Toney.

Had the Johnson fight never happened, most fans today today would say James would dominate him, half of them not knowing who Reggie Johnson was in the first place without looking at Boxrec.

Even if one rates James higher at 160- a fair enough claim- resumes don't fight fights. Styles matter.

I get the feeling a lot of people on here would've had their asses handed to them betting on Frazier vs Foreman....

 

You've made some good points.

We now obviously have the advantage of looking at who Reggie went on to fight afterwards.

For all we know, Billy could go on and beat Jacobs, GG and Canelo. And I would love it if he did.

I agree with you that styles make fights.

If Billy was 100% confident and fighting to his full capabilities, then I'm sure he'd present Toney with some huge problems. I've still got to go with James at this stage though, as he beat guys like Nunn, who in my opinion, was more gifted than Billy was whilst in his prime. He was also significantly bigger than Billy was too.

I respect your opinions, because you don't just look at the resumes of both fighters, you analyse the skill sets of each fighter and then envisage how they'd mesh. It's the complete opposite to how a guy like Todd debates, which is why nobody respects him apart from his cheerleaders. He's picked Billy to win based on the Tiberi fight, despite the fact that Tiberi wasn't even a southpaw.

 

No one talks like he's unbeatable. That's just how you receive and process your info.

And yes, I will tell you that about drugs, if you are questioning them, or saying something equally stupid like, "Everyone knows drugs are great!"

Do yourself a favor and just educate yourself. There's a huge reason I don't post with you on this board.