How good was James Toney at middleweight
How good was James Toney at middleweight
compared to top midd.'s like hagler, hearns, X, ggg etc......?
and i am not talking about record, before anybody gets on my nervs with that shi%&t, but in terms of ability/skill?
i am watching toney's 5 pro fight and i have to say, at middleweight he realy looked incredible. i mean, he always was strong and pwoerful, but that he used to be so fast back than when he was young, thats new to me, he realy had tremendous handspeed as a youngster. people might forget, but james fought middleweight until 92 and had an unbeaten record 31-0-2.
looking back at it, toney realy should have stayed at middleweight. why? cause of everything. it arguably might be his best weight, were he looked the sharpest. also, hopkins was coming up and those 2 would have made a tremendous fight, prime toney vs prime hopkins, now thats something. also financielly with trinidad and oscar coming up, toney would have made much more money. and guys, please dont tell me, that he couldve not made the weight. toney was 5′ 10″ guy, in comparison to pavlik or hopkins who are around 6'1-6'2! had james spent as much time in the gym, as he did at BK and wendys than believe me he would been able to stay at middleweight for a long time
and i am not talking about record, before anybody gets on my nervs with that shi%&t, but in terms of ability/skill?
i am watching toney's 5 pro fight and i have to say, at middleweight he realy looked incredible. i mean, he always was strong and pwoerful, but that he used to be so fast back than when he was young, thats new to me, he realy had tremendous handspeed as a youngster. people might forget, but james fought middleweight until 92 and had an unbeaten record 31-0-2.
looking back at it, toney realy should have stayed at middleweight. why? cause of everything. it arguably might be his best weight, were he looked the sharpest. also, hopkins was coming up and those 2 would have made a tremendous fight, prime toney vs prime hopkins, now thats something. also financielly with trinidad and oscar coming up, toney would have made much more money. and guys, please dont tell me, that he couldve not made the weight. toney was 5′ 10″ guy, in comparison to pavlik or hopkins who are around 6'1-6'2! had james spent as much time in the gym, as he did at BK and wendys than believe me he would been able to stay at middleweight for a long time
-
tiny_acres
- Middleweight
- Posts: 9468
- Joined: 17 Feb 2014, 14:43
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Toney was way behind on the scorecards for the Nunn fight.fergusg wrote:James Toney was merely a decent fighter at 160lbs. His victories over Nunn, Tiberi, Johnson and McCallum were very fortunate indeed!
I think this was by far his biggest win.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
fergusg wrote:James Toney was merely a decent fighter at 160lbs. His victories over Nunn, Tiberi, Johnson and McCallum were very fortunate indeed!
Only the victory over Tiberi was fortunate, in fact that was a robbery. The others were very good wins against great fighters
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Considering he did not put on a pair of boxing gloves until he was 20 I would say he was very gifted, He has rare natural defensive skills.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Sids wrote:Considering he did not put on a pair of boxing gloves until he was 20 I would say he was very gifted, He has rare natural defensive skills.
not true, he won a junior title at west michigan when he was around 15...he had a amateur career, of 33 fights etc.....
-
ReggieDiggs
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3126
- Joined: 05 Jun 2010, 10:37
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
James was a badass 160lber, but his love for cupcakes resulted in him moving up to 168 before he coulda enhanced his rep at 160. Although tbf I don't think he woulda had any more luck vs Roy Jones at 160 then he had at 168 & Roy woulda been getting his chance a couple years earlier if James had stayed at 160 longer.
I thought James had a great run at 160 though. He KTFO of Nunn who was a P4P guy at the time iirc. He beat Reggie Johnson who was a extremely respected high level cat a month after beating Nunn. He beat a legend in Mike McCallum (& had a draw vs him). For a 15 month, 6 title defense run at the top at 160 thats impressive even with the Tiberi decision. I felt like he was the #1 guy during that run & thats all you can really do.
I thought James had a great run at 160 though. He KTFO of Nunn who was a P4P guy at the time iirc. He beat Reggie Johnson who was a extremely respected high level cat a month after beating Nunn. He beat a legend in Mike McCallum (& had a draw vs him). For a 15 month, 6 title defense run at the top at 160 thats impressive even with the Tiberi decision. I felt like he was the #1 guy during that run & thats all you can really do.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
ReggieDiggs wrote:James was a badass 160lber, but his love for cupcakes resulted in him moving up to 168 before he coulda enhanced his rep at 160. Although tbf I don't think he woulda had any more luck vs Roy Jones at 160 then he had at 168 & Roy woulda been getting his chance a couple years earlier if James had stayed at 160 longer.
I thought James had a great run at 160 though. He KTFO of Nunn who was a P4P guy at the time iirc. He beat Reggie Johnson who was a extremely respected high level cat a month after beating Nunn. He beat a legend in Mike McCallum (& had a draw vs him). For a 15 month, 6 title defense run at the top at 160 thats impressive even with the Tiberi decision. I felt like he was the #1 guy during that run & thats all you can really do.
when i look at toneys career, than i see so much crap. lay offs, him being chubby at cruiserweight and heavyweight. i mean, he still had some good wins at cw and hw, but thats not the point. the point is, i like boxers who are prime or near prime and stay long in that kind of shape. toney could have been so much in terms of career achievmants, so much more, than he did, not saying he didnt do much, but simply there for was way more potential. and for me a 5'10 guy should be around middleweight-super middleweight, unless it is some sort of mega big man like david tua
i mean, when he was at higher weights i never understood, why so many people found toney great, all i saw was a chubby guy, with great defensive skills, but overall slow and not so entertaining to watch. but ones i saw, how good he was, when he was younger and in great physical shape, than i understood people, who so said "toney is one of the best".
had he maintained that great physic he had at midd. and sm and stayed around those weight classes, he would have such a tremendous career, with surely many wins over big names like eubank, watson or hopkins, he certainly had the skill to do it
-
Counter-puncher
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 39141
- Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Fergus- you calling toneys ko of nunn a lucky punch reminds me more than ever that you simply don't understand a lot of what you see in the ring.
don't worry you're far from being alone there, Nunn-Toney is a widely-misunderstood fight.
don't worry you're far from being alone there, Nunn-Toney is a widely-misunderstood fight.
-
DoinDamage
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 06 Mar 2015, 22:52
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Right. How is that punch lucky, btw?? That guys probably some huge Closet hater of James. It's so easy to hate on him, as seen in this thread.Counter-puncher wrote:Fergus- you calling toneys ko of nunn a lucky punch reminds me more than ever that you simply don't understand a lot of what you see in the ring.
don't worry you're far from being alone there, Nunn-Toney is a widely-misunderstood fight.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Top mids like GGG? GtfohChepppaaa wrote:compared to top midd.'s like hagler, hearns, X, ggg etc......?
and i am not talking about record, before anybody gets on my nervs with that shi%&t, but in terms of ability/skill?
i am watching toney's 5 pro fight and i have to say, at middleweight he realy looked incredible. i mean, he always was strong and pwoerful, but that he used to be so fast back than when he was young, thats new to me, he realy had tremendous handspeed as a youngster. people might forget, but james fought middleweight until 92 and had an unbeaten record 31-0-2.
looking back at it, toney realy should have stayed at middleweight. why? cause of everything. it arguably might be his best weight, were he looked the sharpest. also, hopkins was coming up and those 2 would have made a tremendous fight, prime toney vs prime hopkins, now thats something. also financielly with trinidad and oscar coming up, toney would have made much more money. and guys, please dont tell me, that he couldve not made the weight. toney was 5′ 10″ guy, in comparison to pavlik or hopkins who are around 6'1-6'2! had james spent as much time in the gym, as he did at BK and wendys than believe me he would been able to stay at middleweight for a long time
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Othro wrote:Top mids like GGG? GtfohChepppaaa wrote:compared to top midd.'s like hagler, hearns, X, ggg etc......?
and i am not talking about record, before anybody gets on my nervs with that shi%&t, but in terms of ability/skill?
i am watching toney's 5 pro fight and i have to say, at middleweight he realy looked incredible. i mean, he always was strong and pwoerful, but that he used to be so fast back than when he was young, thats new to me, he realy had tremendous handspeed as a youngster. people might forget, but james fought middleweight until 92 and had an unbeaten record 31-0-2.
looking back at it, toney realy should have stayed at middleweight. why? cause of everything. it arguably might be his best weight, were he looked the sharpest. also, hopkins was coming up and those 2 would have made a tremendous fight, prime toney vs prime hopkins, now thats something. also financielly with trinidad and oscar coming up, toney would have made much more money. and guys, please dont tell me, that he couldve not made the weight. toney was 5′ 10″ guy, in comparison to pavlik or hopkins who are around 6'1-6'2! had james spent as much time in the gym, as he did at BK and wendys than believe me he would been able to stay at middleweight for a long time
just because he didnt beat no names doesnt mean he is a great boxer
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Toney was a brilliant middleweight on his day, very talented and powerful. I think his dedication was not what it could have been though.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
You just can't keep yourself from throwing a stone at Golovkin even in unrelated conversationfergusg wrote: And besides... those comparing Golovkin to the likes of Hearns and Hagler need to seek help to address extreme psychological issues!
-
ClivePatrickLyons
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 22:10
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Listen all of you people who write in with bullsh.. like he was way behind on points when he knocked so and so out Toney got lucky
WHO WOULD YOUR RATHER BE THE BLOKE WAY AHEAD ON POINTS WHO GETS KNOCKED THE FU.. OUT OR THE BLOKE WAY BEHIND
WHO GETS THE KNOCKOUT I KNOW WHO I'D RATHER BE, Toney good enough if he shows up mentally/physicaly fit to beat any of
legit belt holders today at middleweight but if he didn't against GGG he'd be lucky to survive to hear the final bell that's my opinion
WHO WOULD YOUR RATHER BE THE BLOKE WAY AHEAD ON POINTS WHO GETS KNOCKED THE FU.. OUT OR THE BLOKE WAY BEHIND
WHO GETS THE KNOCKOUT I KNOW WHO I'D RATHER BE, Toney good enough if he shows up mentally/physicaly fit to beat any of
legit belt holders today at middleweight but if he didn't against GGG he'd be lucky to survive to hear the final bell that's my opinion
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
No, you are a limited moron with "extreme psychological issues". You will have a long wait for an apology, so you got enough time to go f yourself.fergusg wrote:I thought you were an intelligent person! Perhaps I was wrong?ikorolev wrote:You just can't keep yourself from throwing a stone at Golovkin even in unrelated conversationfergusg wrote: And besides... those comparing Golovkin to the likes of Hearns and Hagler need to seek help to address extreme psychological issues!
Rather than being ignorant... read the thread again and then apologise to me!
Attackng my comments and being far too lazy to understand the context in which they were said is utterly moronic! Are you a moron?
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
It doesn't mean he isn't but it doesn't mean he is either. No ones putting Anthony Joshua's name up there with Muhammad Ali. A lot of fighters look the part until it's time to prove itChepppaaa wrote:Othro wrote:Top mids like GGG? GtfohChepppaaa wrote:compared to top midd.'s like hagler, hearns, X, ggg etc......?
and i am not talking about record, before anybody gets on my nervs with that shi%&t, but in terms of ability/skill?
i am watching toney's 5 pro fight and i have to say, at middleweight he realy looked incredible. i mean, he always was strong and pwoerful, but that he used to be so fast back than when he was young, thats new to me, he realy had tremendous handspeed as a youngster. people might forget, but james fought middleweight until 92 and had an unbeaten record 31-0-2.
looking back at it, toney realy should have stayed at middleweight. why? cause of everything. it arguably might be his best weight, were he looked the sharpest. also, hopkins was coming up and those 2 would have made a tremendous fight, prime toney vs prime hopkins, now thats something. also financielly with trinidad and oscar coming up, toney would have made much more money. and guys, please dont tell me, that he couldve not made the weight. toney was 5′ 10″ guy, in comparison to pavlik or hopkins who are around 6'1-6'2! had james spent as much time in the gym, as he did at BK and wendys than believe me he would been able to stay at middleweight for a long time
just because he didnt beat no names doesnt mean he is a great boxer
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
It took his first 12 fights in 14 months to capture the Middleweight title, along the way he beat experienced Sanderline Williams, undefeated Merqui Sosa before finally stopping 36-0 unbeaten champion Michael Nunn in 11 rounds.
As he moved through the division the quality of his opponents continued to be of a high standard as the next 3 bouts in 6 months included fighting Reggie Johnson and Mike McCallum.
The following poor performance against Dave Tiberi hinted that a move to Super Middleweight might be imminent and a few fights later he did just that.
The upside is loaded with James Toney's quality of opponent, defence, power, hunger and ability to swing the momentum his opponent had built up to his favour.
Between his defence and attack his defence was the jewel in his crown long term, his determination and capabilities in the trenches, upper body movement, defensive blocking and positioning, ability to ride with punches taking away full impact and really needing no introduction his cast iron chin.
Its hard to say he didnt have the extra gear the top fighters had, he might not have been the best with the tools he possessed but they were good and combined together were challenging for anyone to overcome.
The legitimate grievances against James Toney would be disputed decisions Toney may have received, but by far the biggest concern was Toney's weight issues which continued throughout his career.
I look upon James Toney as a Middleweight very favourably.
As he moved through the division the quality of his opponents continued to be of a high standard as the next 3 bouts in 6 months included fighting Reggie Johnson and Mike McCallum.
The following poor performance against Dave Tiberi hinted that a move to Super Middleweight might be imminent and a few fights later he did just that.
The upside is loaded with James Toney's quality of opponent, defence, power, hunger and ability to swing the momentum his opponent had built up to his favour.
Between his defence and attack his defence was the jewel in his crown long term, his determination and capabilities in the trenches, upper body movement, defensive blocking and positioning, ability to ride with punches taking away full impact and really needing no introduction his cast iron chin.
Its hard to say he didnt have the extra gear the top fighters had, he might not have been the best with the tools he possessed but they were good and combined together were challenging for anyone to overcome.
The legitimate grievances against James Toney would be disputed decisions Toney may have received, but by far the biggest concern was Toney's weight issues which continued throughout his career.
I look upon James Toney as a Middleweight very favourably.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Agree with this, I watched the fight some time later after obviously hearing the result. I was expecting a bolt of lightning out of nowhere, but in fact i was quite impressed the way that Toney started to time him with the right hand for a few rounds, methodically breaking him down, before scoring the stoppage. It wasn't a total beat down and Toney was still trailing on the cards, but he definitely started to work him over before landing the big shot that took him out.Counter-puncher wrote:Fergus- you calling toneys ko of nunn a lucky punch reminds me more than ever that you simply don't understand a lot of what you see in the ring.
don't worry you're far from being alone there, Nunn-Toney is a widely-misunderstood fight.
-
Counter-puncher
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 39141
- Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
read jas80's post above, he understood what he was watching.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
You did not expose anything except your own ignorance regarding the Nunn fight.fergusg wrote:You know I'm correct about you ignoring the GGG comments in this thread though!ikorolev wrote:No, you are a limited moron with "extreme psychological issues". You will have a long wait for an apology, so you got enough time to go f yourself.![]()
![]()
![]()
Being exposed for ignorance clearly upsets you!
Yes, other people introduced GGG into the conversation, but they were making civilized comments while you were throwing "extreme psychological issues" stone.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
After round 9, it was pretty clear that Toney is hurting Nunn and it was just a matter of time. I think Toney's strategy from the very beginning was to go for a KO, as he had huge size and reach disadvantage and was fighting a champion in his home town.fergusg wrote:My perception of the Toney-Nunn fight was based on watching the contest multiple times, the perception of the media and also the one-sided nature of the scoring.ikorolev wrote:You did not expose anything except your own ignorance regarding the Nunn fight.
Toney was losing, his cornermen told him this. Angelo Dundee told Nunn that he was only six minutes away from victory before entering the 11th round.
Toney was fighting like a man who knew he needed the KO to win.
James pretty much scored a Julian Jackson-style KO, which was a weapon that wasn't part of his arsenal, hence the element of luck that allowed him to snatch victory from the jaws of certain defeat.
It was a one-off shot that ruined Nunn.
-
Datsue
- Heavyweight

Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
I always thought coke & hookers ruined Nunn, myself. & yes, Toney broke Nunn down before taking him out. Calling it a "lucky punch" is fvcking stupid.
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Toney was very fast, very skilled and very tough at middleweight - he had a lazy countering style but on his day was a really good boxer to watch; he made it look so easy.
-
chucktaylor
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 535
- Joined: 18 Apr 2010, 18:02
Re: How good was James Toney at middleweight
Amazing, but still luck bro. Toney had no better a chance at landing those shots and KOing those guys than you would have. LOLDatsue wrote:fergusg wrote:s were still highly competitive.
James Toney caught Michael Nunn with a career-defining marvellous left hand that had a devastating effect on the champion. Whilst I’ll agree that Toney was searching for the haymaker, due to his own desperation rather than any masterfully-executed game-plan, hindsight tells us that this was a one-off.
James Toney did not possess the kind of punching power that Julian Jackson and Gerald McClellan was blessed with, which is the reason why I believe that a huge element of luck was responsible for his victory over Nunn.
Okay, so when Toney was badly cut against Tim Littles & within minutes of the ref's inspection & the doctor's threat to stop the fight due to the blood obscuring his face, & then he turned around & levelled Littles, that was that a "lucky punch" as well?
Amazing he managed to produce two such lucky finishes, with--off the top of my head--the same Goddamn punch, a big left hook!