Who has been the better overall fighter Toney or Holyfield?

Toney was far more skilled than Holyfield, but Holyfield was obviously more popular and made way more money due to his success in his prime at heavyweight.

Toney was the more complete fighter, though, and I think if you compare resumes, accomplished more impressive things.

 

Holyfield.

 

Are you taking weight into account?

I am not sure how this works.

Well, the answer, anyway, is Holyfield.

He was the better fighter - the more successful fighter.

 

Toney

 

Holyfield is better.
He accomplished greater things.

But if James Toney had bothered to stay in some sort of shape it might have been a different story.

 

Toney is an underachiever, Holyfield an overachiever.If Toney worked as hard as Holyfield, James would probably be a chisled light heavyweight .
Toney is a more skilled boxer for sure, but Holyfields work ethic and will are his ingredients for success.Toneys success is in spite of his eating disorder.

 

Evander Holyfield

 

On that note:

If my mother had testicles, I might have been confused.

 

Holyfield.

 

Are we talking in terms of accomplishments or skills? In terms of accomplishments I have Holy way above Toney, where in terms of skills they are about even in my book, considering they were completely two different types of fighters.

 

atsch :rofl

what the hell.... There are actually people picking Toney!??/ What?

This isn't even close. Toney won titles in three divisions, while HOLYFIELD WON CHAMPIONSHIPS.

Who's the greatest fighter Toney has beaten? Nunn? Jirov?

Holyfield's resume is a who's who of the last 20 years. Qawi, De Leon, Douglas, Tyson, Bowe, Foreman, Pinklon Thomas, Michael Dokes, Larry Holmes, Ray Mercer...and there are people that think TONEY, one of the biggest wastes of talent in the last 20 years, has been the overall better fighter? Get the hell out of here...why the hell does Toney have so many fans

 

I did not want to be as explicit as you were, as I could not fully understand the thread topic question but you are absolutely correct.

 

Toney at his best is fun to watch. But he's seldom at his best.

Holyfield has the proven resume, being at his best not only during his prime, but rising to the challenge again and again as a heavyweight to rebound from defeats or underwhelming victories.

Both were capable of throwing magnificent combinations, but Toney was mostly an inside fighter. Holyfield could fight inside and outside, handling fighters were more varied styles.

Toney tended to fall in love with his own talent for moving opponents around, making them miss while not doing enough to hurt them and get 'em out.

OTOH... Toney busted up opponents legitimately with punches while Holyfield did it with punches, head butts, elbows, forearms, shoulders, whatever he had handy.

 

Toney has more wins in championship fights, and he KO'd holyfield.