a fight where you have to judge between harder and accurate shots....vs slaps and sissy flurries controversial outcome but most likely a fight i'd score to Toney
It would be a contentious one. Calzaghe would get the decision. I would cry bloody murder that Toney clearly won and would be right.:kick:
Toney by SD..in a fight were Calzaghe takes a crazy amount of punishment late in the fight....get knockdown late..but survives to lose a close decision..
The problem with threads like this is most of you have no idea what you are talking about. James Toney, although one of the best fighters ever, was one of the most inconsistent. I think Toney at his best beats the best Calzaghe. Keep in mind Toney went life and death with several lesser fighters, including a criminal robbery versus a nobody named Dave Tiberi. (The announcer almost got killed when he called the decision "Disgusting" right to Toney's face, ) In reality, I think Joe wins a close one, not because he was better, because he was professional. Toney would say some Hopkinsesque crap about never losing to a faggot white boy and then would throw 5 punches a round. Honestly, you guys are making Calzaghe as if he is Iran Barkely. He is not going to get counter all night like Tito. 10 TIMES THEY GO 5-5. IF I am betting, I bet Calzaghe ud because he was a professional fighter.
Toney was more consistent at 168 than 160. He performed poorly against Jones, but I think that was more of a terrible style matchup than his weight problems, which I think are exaggerated. Toney has actually been in top shape for probably just a few fights. Toney's great at countering and Calzaghe leaves a lot of openings. Toney would definitely get through with some real nice shots. Toney's workrate was actually usually pretty good, because he lets his hands go in combination. But Calzaghe was good at adjusting mid-fight. He also is more mobile on his feet than the other come-forward guys that Toney tore up. I suspect this will end in another close decision in Toney's career that can be debated. I'll go with Toney by a majority decision.
tONEY WAS better at 168 no doubt but still he failed to impress most times. I also don't think the weight problems are overstated at all. Lampley was interviewed and he said he saw James Toney get off the scale and drink a whole pitcher of water, ice cubes and all. There were huge rumblings about his not being able to hit weight before the fight. Still, I think Jones would have won regardless, just style-wise. It would have been an 7-5,8-4 type of fight and not the 12-0 it was, imo.
The difference is that unlike most pressure fighters, Calzaghe is able to fight effectively from outside and backing away too. I think he could beat Toney the same fashion Jones did, with superior speed and movement, though it wouldn't be as lopsided of course
Oh fuck off jebroni, your self appointed arbiter of all boxing wisdom act is a stone cold yawn.:shit:
when Toney lands he would land solid shots that would rock Calzaghe's head back but i bet when Calzaghe landed his sissy slaps they would appear to have no effect at all on Toney also Calzaghe could most likely get knocked down in the first 2 rounds not the sort of fight Calzaghe would deserve to win
Identify yourself, know nothing!! I have posted here for years. There are 5 people who saw James Toney fight in the 1990's and you and shortstaff are not in that group.
I have 54+ fights on DVD of Toney alone. I wouldn't be surprised if I haven't seen 98% of his fights. I am a huge JT fan. Still, he was always, always inconsistent. He was actually a bit more consistent at Heavyweight:::: I saw Toney lose to some bloke named Drake Thadzi or something like. Never heard of him before or after but he beat JT legitimately. He had trouble with Reggie Johnson too. He easily could have lost that. He could have lost the 1 of the Mccallum fights. I thought he did lose at least the rematch to Montell. Clearly, JT struggled and lost to worse fighters than Joe Calzaghe. That is why I say, if both come in their top shape, I see JT nicking it; in reality, JT ho-hos and ding dongs his way to a ud loss.
If we're talking about the Toney that tortured Barkley, then I'd favor James. Or at least its a pick em. Not trying to compare Barkley to Calz, but that was Toney at his absolute motivated best, and I think that version of JT would have been a handful for Calz. If Toney is anything less than at 100%, then Joe beats him.
exactly, that is a exactly what I am saying. JT/Barkely was one , at the time, people thought could go a long way. Nowdays, it seems laughable. JT could have been arrested for what he did.
That could also be due to his comp @ 168 being far inferior to that of his MW reign. Off the top of my head... Barkley was probably the best guy he fought @ 168. PCW. Thornton, Littles... damn, I think that's it. The rest were non-title fights against non-contenders, if I'm not mistaken. I agree with the outcome. RWTP said it best, how you view the outcome ultimately comes down to style points. The post-fight debates would be similar to Leonard-Hagler and Taylor-Hopkins in that regard.
Toney controversial MD James would of landed the more telling blows in persuading the judges to give him the hard to score rds This would of been a very close and entertaining fight.
Jirov was a good boxer from the outside too. And hit harder than Calzaghe. And although he might not have been "as" busy as Calzaghe, he certainly threw a lot of punches. My guess is had the match-up between he and RJJ taken place, Jirov would've in the very least given RJJ the toughest fight of his career up to that point. That's probably why it didn't happen. But back to the matter at hand. Jirov, despite his boxing ability - he won a gold medal at the Olympics afterall, smothered himself too much against Toney and IMHO fought the wrong fight (or had the wrong trainer). When Jirov wasn't in Toney's chest giving him plenty of countering opportunities, Toney was left to throw leaping right hands, some of which landed and some of which didn't. But at a distance, Jirov was controlling the pace and making much better use of his south-paw advantage. Unfortunately for him, his trainer (Brooks), thought his best approach was to square up and beat on Toney. Why would he have done that? I think Barkley showed fairly decively that that's not how to beat Toney. In fact, that's how to play into Toney's hands - let him rest against the ropes and just throw counters. I don't know what Jirov's team was thinking with their fight plan. But my guess is had there been a rematch Jirov would've boxed much more and probably would've won.
