James Toney vs Joe Calzaghe (168lbs)

Calzaghe by UD, something like 8-4, maybe 7-5 if both (primarily Toney) are at their very best.

 

He said prime for prime, not currently. How often do you have to expose yourself as a moron before it starts to sink in and make you rethink things?

 

I doubt it'd be a one-sided shut-out.

 

You're gay? It's alright if you're gay dude, I don't care. Just stick to jerking off to Hagler posters rather than hitting on male ESB posters.

But back on topic, explain your comment about Toney. The thread clearly said prime for prime, which was obvious enough. So, instead of getting off topic like you seem to have mastered, explain your original post.

 

Explain your original post.

 

i think calzaghe would win a razor thin verdict and maybe have to get up off the matt but i think he would outwork toney for 12 rounds

 

Two counterpunchers, primarily. Calzaghe would be the obvious pick to abandon the tactic first which would play into a patient Toney's hands. Calzaghe would go for volume while Toney would rely on accuracy and harder punching.

A very competitive fight but if an ancient Hopkins can make a close fight with patient couterpunching, then a peak Toney would go better than that. UD for JT, with JC a dead cert to hit the mat at least once.

 

Calzaghe wins this imo, it's the ability to box using his legs that enables it for him. Even exchanging, i think it would be pretty good, but Toney may ultimately get the better of that until Calzage adapts and takes the decision.

 

:good

 

The main problem Calzaghe had with Hopkins's counter-punching style was the fact that he was able to do it on the move, which made it difficult for Calzaghe to get set, while worrying about the sharp counters in the process. Toney on the other hand was chronically flat-footed, which was shown to be a hindrance for him against fighters with top notch lateral movement or footspeed, fighters like Calzaghe for instance.

Yes, Hopkins and Toney were both top level counter-punchers, but Hopkins's lateral movement and ring generalship was the main deterrance for Calzaghe early on. Toney would pose no such problems. Really, we're dealing with a fighter who can fight in a variety of ways in Calzaghe, and a fighter who mostly fights in one style (albeit a very effective one, especially against the right opponents) in Toney. Calzaghe's adaptability would be a major asset here as well.

 

Very good post Pea, touched on the weakness of Toney that i touched on also, the legs. Also, on the point you made on the differences between Hopkins and Toney, i would also like to add, that Hopkins is the only man that has ever been able to slow the pace and dictate his own against Joe, no1 else has done it. I dont think Toney would either, even when he has the better of the in face stuff, he'd be doing it rapid fire when using his angles, this would still mean a bit of success for Joe imo, even if moreso for Toney, then Calzage still has that other option of adapting to another fighting style, the style which has always been the weakness of Toney. I cant see this for Toney.

 

Prime v prime at their best it would be like Jones-Toney? If you think Toney was at his best for that fight, boil your head in a saucepan.