Why So Much Praise For The "If Only" Fighters: (Toney, Judah, Khan, etc.)

[-PBP-]

I don't think he'd have beaten Roy even at 100%.

Roy was a freak of nature.

A bad style match up.

The Griffin fights were extremely close though, and I think Toney could have won clear had he have been sharper and in better shape.

Like so many of his fights around that time, he had to battle the scales before the fighter.

I only buy the motivation factor for losses like Thadzi. Griffin was an awkward fighter with underrated skills and I just don't think Toney could figure him out.

I just can't buy these excuses.

Against Roy Jones, he had to drain himself to make weight and was sluggish.

OK, he moves up in weight, so he doesn't have to drain himself, and loses to Montell Griffin.

Griffin beats him in a close fight.

He was under prepared and took Griffin lightly

He gets a 2nd shot at Griffin, after being in the ring with him for 12 rounds, knowing his tendencies and motivated to avenge a prior loss. And still couldn't get it done.

Why can't we just admit that Griffin was either the better or just had Toney's number? Why do we have to use the "if only excuse"

That's where I'm getting at.

[IronDanHamza]

I only buy the motivation factor for losses like Thadzi. Griffin was an awkward fighter with underrated skills and I just don't think Toney could figure him out.

I just can't buy these excuses.

Against Roy Jones, he had to drain himself to make weight and was sluggish.

OK, he moves up in weight, so he doesn't have to drain himself, and loses to Montell Griffin.

Griffin beats him in a close fight.

He was under prepared and took Griffin lightly

He gets a 2nd shot at Griffin, after being in the ring with him for 12 rounds, knowing his tendencies and motivated to avenge a prior loss. And still couldn't get it done.

Why can't we just admit that Griffin was either the better or just had Toney's number? Why do we have to use the "if only excuse"

That's where I'm getting at.

Montel Griffin is HIGHLY skilled. Trained by Eddie Futch, that's all he has, great skills.

He's small, not very talented, doesn't have much power, doesn't have much speed, doesn't have a great chin or durability, but he gets by on skill alone.

For my money, Montel Griffin is more skilled than Toney.

Just to touch on the Thadzi loss, why doesn't Thadzi get credit?

Yeah, Toney missed weight, but Thadzi's game plan was fantastic. Completely neutralised Toney in there.

[IronDanHamza]

Fact?

Ha!

Whatever. I can't be bothered with you. I'll let someone else engage you.

Yes, fact.

He's not even a HOF caliber fighter, fact.

Therefore he's far far FAR from being a great fighter. FACT.

[-PBP-]

Montel Griffin is HIGHLY skilled. Trained by Eddie Futch, that's all he has, great skills.

He's small, not very talented, doesn't have much power, doesn't have much speed, doesn't have a great chin or durability, but he gets by on skill alone.

For my money, Montel Griffin is more skilled than Toney.

Just to touch on the Thadzi loss, why doesn't Thadzi get credit?

Yeah, Toney missed weight, but Thadzi's game plan was fantastic. Completely neutralised Toney in there.

I didn't say he shouldn't get credit. I just meant I can see why people may use Toney's "out of shape" excuse for that particular fight.

As opposed to Montell Griffin who IMO, was just a flat out better fighter and proved it over the course of 24 rounds.

[IronDanHamza]

I didn't say he shouldn't get credit. I just meant I can see why people may use Toney's "out of shape" excuse for that particular fight.

As opposed to Montell Griffin who IMO, was just a flat out better fighter and proved it over the course of 24 rounds.

I don't use "he was out of shape" for ANY of his fights because when was Toney ever in shape? Is there a fight he was supposed to be in shape for?

As for Griffin, agreed 100% but that's seen as a controversial opinion.

[-PBP-]

I don't use "he was out of shape" for ANY of his fights because when was Toney ever in shape? Is there a fight he was supposed to be in shape for?

As for Griffin, agreed 100% but that's seen as a controversial opinion.

He's not the more accomplished fighter but in terms of head to head skill, he proved he is at least of the same caliber.

He was giving prime Roy Jones hell for 7 or 8 rounds. Performed much better than Toney or even Hopkins. He gets flack for the rematch but he just ran into a pissed off killer that had it in his mind that he would end it in 1 round that night.

[IronDanHamza]

He's not the more accomplished fighter but in terms of head to head skill, he proved he is at least of the same caliber.

He was giving prime Roy Jones hell for 7 or 8 rounds. Performed much better than Toney or even Hopkins. He gets flack for the rematch but he just ran into a pissed off killer that had it in his mind that he would end it in 1 round that night.

Yeah his chin just isn't good unfortunately.

He dominated Daraiusz for 4 rounds before getting stopped. Early stoppage but he was on his way anyway.

That and Roy 2 were his only legit loss's of his prime/close to prime years.

[New England]

how is a guy who was the top ranked MW, SMW, and CW on the planet, and who contended all the way to HW, an "if only" fighter? because he was that talented? i really don't understand the argument. james toney is an underachiever only if you think he has ungodly talent. the guy accomplished a lot. sam peter weighed 250 lbs, ffs.

he's two inches taller than floyd mayweather and has roughly the same reach. no, i'm not implying that he was naturally the same size floyd, but that doesn't mean he was a natural HW or cruiserweight, either.

fight of the year against the top ranked CW in the world at the time. alphabet titles at MW, SMW, and CW. maybe an alphabet title at HW, but i'd have to look at the timeline and the drug tests

these are accomplishments that stand out and separate you from the the amir khan's and zab judah's of the world. and yes, james toney is a cinch for the hall of fame.

[robertzimmerman]

I only buy the motivation factor for losses like Thadzi. Griffin was an awkward fighter with underrated skills and I just don't think Toney could figure him out.

I just can't buy these excuses.

Against Roy Jones, he had to drain himself to make weight and was sluggish.

OK, he moves up in weight, so he doesn't have to drain himself, and loses to Montell Griffin.

Griffin beats him in a close fight.

He was under prepared and took Griffin lightly

He gets a 2nd shot at Griffin, after being in the ring with him for 12 rounds, knowing his tendencies and motivated to avenge a prior loss. And still couldn't get it done.

Why can't we just admit that Griffin was either the better or just had Toney's number? Why do we have to use the "if only excuse"

That's where I'm getting at.

Griffin was a tough match up stylistically, but a lot of people think Toney won and it's well known that he had weight troubles before both fights. That was Toney's downfall. Even though he moved up to LHW, he still had to drain himself.

[robertzimmerman]

Yes, fact.

He's not even a HOF caliber fighter, fact.

Therefore he's far far FAR from being a great fighter. FACT.

Don't quote me again you clown.

I've heard it all now.

Michael Nunn was far, far, far away from being a great fighter, and it's a fact?

Ha!

Yeah.