Retrospective: Toney vs Jones

I agree that Toney was the best in that division and he was also considered the best. But I am not sure Barkley was considered the man in that division when Toney beat him.

 

:deal

 

46 - 0

 

I am sure there are a lot of fans that completely disagree with what you think. It seems there are about 4 or 5 fans on here that attack Calzaghe daily and give eachother little emoticons as signs of approval but that's about it. Anyway my post was about elite fighters who didn't live up to their talent. As for Calzaghe he did beat BHOP in the middle of one of BHOPs best runs and just for the fact that Kovalev is regarded as this great fighter already when a 8 yr older BHOP is his best victory speaks volumes.

 

Hopkins was 40 year old and not in his prime.Taylor did beat him twice before.Very close fight too.

Anyway, it is still a decent win for Calzaghe.But prime for prime Bernard beats that ass easily.

 

I'm sorry while I do see Benard as the greater fighter prime for prime Calzaghe was all wrong for Benard. Benards prime anyway is hard to gauge was it when he ruling MW where his best wins are smaller fighters or when he moved up to LHW to become lineal because of losses to Jermain Taylor. Calzaghe was a lot better than JT and Benard was smaller at MW and weaker. Benard when he moved up to LHW he best a bigger fighter and became lineal as well as he was in the top P4P best fighters in the world. His run was Tarver, Wright, Pavlik, Roy jones jr ( I don't count) and then Pascal. That is Hopkins best consecutive fight streak period. In the middle of all that he lost to Calzaghe. Even today Kovalev is considered a great fighter but his best win is a 50 yr old Hopkins.

 

ALL fighters are different, and peak at different times... Roy was no longer an elite fighter during the Johnson fight and would never win another meaningful fight, while Johnson was on the best run of his career.

Are you really that simple minded to no understand this?

Are you saying Johnson was at some kind of disadvantage because he was two weeks older.atsch

Take your factual statistics and shove them up your butt pipe you ignorant baboon.

 

I would say RJJ was a natural counter-puncher. That was his style.

 

Certainly disagree.Toney was the most skilled of the three.Head to ahead JT beats of them,prime for prime.

A prime and in shape Toney, only Roy could have beat him back then in my view.

 

:good

 

I responded to your post about Benard and Jermain Taylor. The JT in my post was referring to Jermain Taylor.

 

If if... Sounds a bit bias towards American fighters.

If he lost that clearly to Jones it means he wasn´t that unbeatable. Your logic could be a bit more convincing if Toney had put a fight against Jones, but he didn´t - He was just too slow, too stationary and too proud. Far from unbeatable. He lost many fights and in many fights he was loosing on points.

 

Disappointing relative to his skills, yes. As far as legacy is concerned, Toney certainly ranks above Calzaghe.

 

Oh is that simple minded you will soon learn