James Toney ~VS~ Jersey Joe Walcott

It was a legitimate win for Louis, based on the scoring system used at the time, as was confirmed by NY commission.

Most of his career he was nothing more than a journeyman. A very inconsistent one. All those excuses about him starving, etc, are bull**** that are not backed up by anything.

 

I think I'll go with Toney in the early rounds. Round 1 sounds about right.

 

He had no decent management until 1945.
He was a struggling black prelim fighter, got given fights for tiny purses at late-notice, he was a manual worker or on the relief checks, not a fully-paid full-time fighter.
Management is important, obviously.

 

Walcott. He hit harder, and had the type of stuff that could spoil Toney's style of counter punching.

 

While both are superb boxers Walcott has three key advantages.

1. He hits much harder.
2. He is faster.
3. He is more mobile.

Taking these three advantages into consideration I dont see what Toney can bring to the table that he cant deal with.

 

You are a little gem.

 

If he had a little more talent, he'd still get through without so many bad marks. You don't lose so many fights, especially at your hometown, unless you are just an inconsistent journeyman. Great old timers fought more often and often in life conditions as bad as Walcott's, but were more successful and consistent than him.

 

4. Toney doesn't like fighters who are laid-back and not aggressive, he is best when the opponent comes at him.

 

Okay, okay.... 1 minute into round 2, I'll be fair to Walcott.

 

no joe beat a washed up charles twice. where as when they were both younger, charles whopped dat ass.
also toney is far more of a complete fighter than charles.

 

Joe would give james Toney a ass kicking like hes never had, tko in late rds.

 

Jersey joe Walcott is a hot and cold fighter, i hate it when people try and make it sound like hes a true ATG, when he really isnt one. The man lost to a contender like rex layne at his peak, he has many other losses to lesser fighters.

 

Rex Layne was tearing threw dicison at time, and had beat 3 top ten contenders, Layne was touted as next Dempsey. It's not like Walcott got beat by some John Ruiz type.

 

LMAO :rofl
i forgot the main points.

walcott at best weighed below 200, only just. and in the cruiserweight division toney still had one punch knockout power. he had plenty of one punch ko's when he weighed around 190-200. so anyone saying walcott hit harder is ignorant. im not saying toney hit harder, we cant tell.

some idiot said walcott was faster, and another said he was more mobile than toney. maybe on his feet but it didnt make his defense any betta. toney is so good he could stand infront of you and you still cant hit him.

i know how great walcott was, but you guyz are sure underestimating toney, watch his fights and trust me you will have a different opinion.
since walcott is only a cruiser, i see toney stopping him, after breaking him down.

another important point, i have never seen a fighter like toney who had the same patience, composure and patience. it is almost impossible to break james toney in any way. for a guy with a bad temper he is amaizingly patient in the ring with great concentration.