BoxRec

Dunno about Peter and Rahman, they've always looked like guys with natural builds to me, but I certainly suspect the other names in that list.

In Toney's case it seems he had to take steroids due to an injury to his pituatary gland.

In any case, it's over now. If he's juicing and barely scraping by against the calibre of opponent he had last time around, there's nowhere left to go.

Toney has been easier and easier to hit of late, I hope that during his year long ban, (if indeed the ban is enforced across the board), he thinks long and hard about retiring. The guy must be pretty minted, he has a wife and kids, and if he stops now, may retain enough neurons to continue functioning normally enough to enjoy the rest of his life.

Terry D wrote:

Autobarn wrote:

Terry D wrote: Are you saying Toney could do no wrong by fight III? He was coming off a loss and went straight into one. He beat Mike clearly in fight three and closely in fight one.

Mike was old in fight one but his style did not rely on Jones-like dancing. They matched skill for skill and Toney had him hurt in the final round.

Nah, I'm putting in temporal elipses, in the style of experimental writing. The fight 3 bit was a slight leap forward

Toney could be terrific, but I feel there was doubt about him. Nearly all those middleweight fights were uncomfortably close, hence why there are arguments either way. I think Toney is suited to higher weights, where his toughness counts at a bit slower pace, with bigger openings to exploit.

Subliminal ellipses would be more apt, I like Heidegger so I'm for breaking the rules

I felt Toney edged Mike overall. Both men negated the other but Toney dug-out bigger shots. Mike was a canny old fox and brought the best, stamina permitting, out of Toney.

Toney could have been very good at LH. The first Griffin error killed his resolve a little.

Nah, it was a less dramatic nod to 2001: A Space Odyssey, which goes from the dawn of man to the future.

Were it not for the day before weigh in, which the IBF were the first to go with, Toney would have been a super middle-going-on-light heavy. Light heavy is where he should have peaked. But I think lik Castillo at lightweight, Toney stayed at the wrong weight that little bit too long. But it's like he did it three times, at 160 (2nd McCallum), 168 (Jones, what a time to mess up!) and 175 (Tiberi)

American boxing has an obsession with middleweight lineage, IMO. Hence Arum having him fight once in Monte Carlo. That actually hurt Toney in the long run - vs dellaquila he was over the weight yet the bout sanctioned - mad! I can be critical of JT in this period - I felt he won some and lost some at middle, but he was depleted for hard fight after hard fight.

Toney has been easier and easier to hit of late, I hope that during his year long ban, (if indeed the ban is enforced across the board), he thinks long and hard about retiring. The guy must be pretty minted, he has a wife and kids, and if he stops now, may retain enough neurons to continue functioning normally enough to enjoy the rest of his life.

yeah, he got some good money on HBO/Showtime televised fights with Holyfield, Rahman, Peter (twice). I hear regular $3-4m which isn't bad considering the results/spectacle.

What a shame he didn't stay at cruiser for a Jirov rematch and wars with Bell, Mormeck, Braithwaite, Kelvin Davis and Johnny Nelson. He would have made less money per fight but would definitely have fought more, not suffered weight lifting / steroid associated injuries and would have proven himself a great 19--200-pounder.

I prefer the Clarke book to the film. Great stories about AI and destiny/evolution. Although that end of the genre sci-fi isn't my preferred reading. I find all the technological descriptions distracting. Always liked a good Phillip K Dick mindbender or a bit of cyberpunk mayhem, though I do like Ian (M) Banks as well.

Could be argued that the economical approach would have made JT perfect for a long career at 175 and cruiser. Though fights with Nunn and Mike M - however we score 'em - are certainly no regrets.

I felt that by the time of stoppage, Toney was ahead. Because of mid rounds pressure and knockdowns. Had it gone to points, he would have had another 10-8 or 10-7 round to be (theoretically) winning.

Toney should have won the Griffin fights. Seems like there was only 1 guy landing cleanly. Wonder how his career would've gone if he'd have been given the W's that he probably deserved. Certainly wouldn't have taken a late notice, minor title fight with Thadzi...

TONEY is defo finished now he has just been done for roids again.

Terry D wrote:

Autobarn wrote:I prefer the Clarke book to the film. Great stories about AI and destiny/evolution. Although that end of the genre sci-fi isn't my preferred reading. I find all the technological descriptions distracting. Always liked a good Phillip K Dick mindbender or a bit of cyberpunk mayhem, though I do like Ian (M) Banks as well.

Could be argued that the economical approach would have made JT perfect for a long career at 175 and cruiser. Though fights with Nunn and Mike M - however we score 'em - are certainly no regrets.

The second one was ace, the book that is, when the 'Lucifer Rising' bit got underway I thought 'fook me, I never saw that coming'. I'm not really into Sci-Fi but read a bit of Clarke and Dick. I always thought the title 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep (AKA Bladerunner)' and the unicorn in his dreams/fantasies in the film show Deckard was a replicant. As did that guy knowing what he dreamt off.

Yes, spot on, Terry, and don't forget the Deckard/Descartes play on names that harks back to Meditations and Discourses...

Captain Hook wrote:No way is Toney's legacy better than that of Barrera and Morales....

You included Jirov and bloody Guinn in that list!! and a tired old McCallum...

Imo Toney edges Morales in accomplishments...problem is that he turned out to be a steroid cheat, so EM and MAB deserve more respect than Toney does.