Jones, Toney, Hopkins, Calzaghe - ATG list

How good was Toney really? He got outclassed by RJJ and lost to Montell Griffin. He was a good fighter, but who did he beat to be recognised as a great fighter?

He took almost 7-8 rounds to stop an old Iran Barkely when Nigel Benn has destroyed him one round a few years before

 

He won belts in 3 different divisions, was a serious player in the heavyweight division, knocking out Holyfield, beating Ruiz, and giving guys like Peter and Rahman all they could handle, not to mention big wins over hall of famers like Mccallum, Nunn, and Barkley, he also went up to Cruiser to take on the feared undefeated champ in Jirov. He has done enough IMO to be considered a legend.

 

Bumped up.... It's funny now that many of you think because a past it RJJ loses to Calzaghe, he's no longer top on the ATG list. Surely RJJ achievments are better than B-Hops... the only thing B-Hop has in his favour is that he perhaps the longevity.... but then he probably beats most fighters in that regard...as he has performed at a high level up until 43 (and counting).....RJJ was also a champ undefeated for 45+ fights and included wins over Hopkins and Toney, which IMO, put him always above the other three 3 (Bhop, Toney and Calzaghe)

 

Jones
Hopkins Hopkins is only a hair behind Jones this is really close.
Toney
Calzaghe

 

Jones
Toney
Hopkins
Calzaghe

People really underrate Toney

 

Greatness aint just about skills, its about hard work and dedication.

Skill wise toney is up there but he's a fat lazy **** and doesn't deserve to be higher than 4th on this list

 

you said in your first post that joe "under-achieved" - now you say that "there is not one fighter hopkins beat that joe couldn't have done the same to...".

a fighter who underachieves but was still the legitimate champion of his weightclass (as jones and hopkins were) but who has to be defended on an ATg list as someone who 'could have done the same' is exactly the reason why he has to be listed under them.

joe was a good fighter, but using 'what might have been' doesn't excuse his "underachievement".

 

He's been a Pro for 21/22 years.

For the first 7/8 years he was in MW up to LHW, and faces some great opponents.

Even in 2003 against Jirov, almost 15 years after turning professional, he looked in great shape.

So does it destroy all his good work that he's ballooned up at times, or that he's really let him since go since then? :huh

And how does greatness not include skills exactly?

 

1. Jones - In his prime he was practically Superman. Plus even when he was seriously shot he dropped calzaghe in 1st round. Imagine if he had swarmed all over him and put him away like the younger jones would have done. He was ould of been top 20 ATG material.

2. Bernard - Although he fought tomato cans for 8 years until then beating up two welters, he went on to gain some great wins at light heavy and nearly beat calzaghe in a close match at 43.

3. Calzaghe - Undefeated and super middleweight champ for 11 years, although competition was good to very poor (tucker pudwill) ending on a high note will a crafty win over hopkins.

4. Toney - perhaps would be above calazaghe if he had kept his weight below heavyweight.

 

1. Jones Jr.
2. Hopkins.
3. Calzaghe - If Calzaghe had gone to America earlier and still pulled off the wins against both Jones Jr and Hopkins, then this list may have looked differently. It's all IF's and BUT's though.
4. Toney.

 

But apparently beating Kessler and a 43 year old Hopkins eclipses all of that

 

he didn't say it's not about skills - he said it doesn't just include them.

 

Ah, misunderstood.

There's still no way people should be putting him in 4th

 

He lost to Jones because he struggled to make weight, this isn't a new development.

 

thats a tough one.

at least calzaghe was a great disciplinarian when it came to fitness and training, whereas toney was his own worst enemy.