James Toney vs Joe Calzaghe.

Again, you're looking for an angle.

Nunn was an elite fighter, who'd had great wins.

Forget all of this 'natural' talk.

Go and look at who he beat.

Then look at who those guys beat.

Then do the same with Mike.

IMHO, Nunn and Mike were better fighters than Hopkins and Kessler.

You're entitled to your opinion.

But look who Mike had beaten before Toney beat him, then look at who Hopkins had beaten before Joe beat him.

Again, I've taken age and accomplishments etc into consideration.

I know that this thread is looking at SMW and LHW.

But I was just giving my opinion on their best wins.

But let's not pretend that MW and SMW are worlds apart.

When Toney was motivated and sharp against Barkley, he wasn't a completely different fighter to the one he'd been when he'd beaten Nunn and McCallum just prior.

Again, I'd put the Barkley version of James against any version of Joe.

 

Great, so final time to prove you are not a complete ducker, can you tell me what Toneys best SMW win and LHW win is please .
Watch the duck

 

What difference will it make when he answers you?

He said that James had more overall success.

Which is true.

Also, even if he hasn't had better wins at those specific weights than Joe, it doesn't mean that he couldn't have beaten him.

 

Funny how u only use two divisions when he competed in at least 4


But his best wins at SMW were Barkley and Williams at LHW he didn't face anyone of note only had a few fights there and then moved to Cruiser .But like I said his wins over McCallum and Nunn at middle are better than any win Joe had at super middle ! The only win that puts him on par with that is Hopkins at LHW ! But you want to compare yet he only fought once there !

 

Please dont but in. He has pulled several ducks and it will be interesting to see how he acts here.
Best thing you can do is move along Loudon, this is big boy sh*t

 

Loudon is always welcomed in these debates !

Seems you never have a problem jumping in when someone brings up Joe

 

I suppose because I know what I am talking about. I saw you get schooled by Serge. But you are correct, Loudon is welcome and it was a joke that I expect Loudon got, whilst as it has been noted about you not being the brightest or very witty, probably felt a need to defend atsch:|

 

The problem bailey has is that can't form any substantial opinions based on empirical evidence because he clearly doesn't properly understand what it is he's looking at when he's watching a boxer. Which is why we get these tedious, long winded copy and paste jobs courtesy of boxrec.

I mean, want to know how good Michael Nunn was? Close the boxrec tab and go watch some of his fights.

 

Yep, Loudon has a sense of humour.
Imbecile1 self pwned

 

Watched them as they happened and thats possibly where you fall down, watching the fights and not knowing the history of the opponents

 

Schooled by Serge is like getting schooled by you only you two believe that **** !

And again don't get to big for your britches there Failey you always been the boxing rec queen around here don't forget who you are , because if you keep acting up I will expose you like I have done so many times in the past ..Just out of curiosity did you ever get a chance to watch the Hill Devalle fight yet

 

Bailey,

I haven't got the patience to play these games of yours.

I'll highlight the relevant points.

Michael Nunn had beaten Tate, Kalambay, Barkley, Starling and Curry. Don't try and downgrade those wins. They were quality wins and Nunn was an elite southpaw.

Mike had beaten Jackson, McCrory, Curry, Kalambay, Graham, Watson, Collins. They were quality wins against quality opposition.

If Mike and Nunn were in their prime now, they'd be in the P4P top ten for sure.

They were just top class, elite fighters.

The guys who they both beat would also be top fighters today.

Look at a guy like Herol Graham? I feel so bad for him, because in today's era, he definitely would have held a version of the title IMO.

Again, you can spin things to downgrade them, or you can play the 'he ended up losing to him, who went on to lose to him' game, but it's all nonsense.

You can also do the same but in reverse, without allowing for certain circumstances.

Now compare Kessler's attributes to Nunn and Mike.

Then compare his record going into the fight with Joe.

It's a joke.

Apart from the fight being big, because it was a unification fight, beating Kessler was nowhere near as great as beating Nunn and Mike, even if you account for Joe's age etc.

Hopkins is a great fighter, and his longevity is incredible.

But I don't think he was as good as Nunn and Mike.

He's just lasted longer.

Nunn's troubles are well documented.

So IMHO, Toney has had better wins.

Even though those wins were at MW, James fought Barkley just a few years later, while being just a few pounds heavier.

Again, when I highlight the Barkley win, I'm looking at James's condition and how motivated he was, and not specifically at Barkley as an opponent.

I would put that version of James in with any SMW version of Joe.