Fighters most people dislike but you like

Dick phelan

As the thread saids whos a fighter who was not liked by the general public but you like, for me its got to be naz i mean yeah he was sooo cocky but seriously what an entertainer he was boxing abilities aside he was a true showman and great entertainment and i for one loved his entrances and general swagger i miss him from the game even if most people think he is a twat

A.G.S

chris eubank loved the simply the best entrance music by tina turner

soprano123

Naz for me as well , Sat nights in the bars were great I went to Naz vs Barrera and what a show it was

walshb

Khan and James Toney.

FTA69

Definitely James Toney for me. Not only was he one of the most technically skilled boxers of the modern era, he was also tough as nails and up for fighting anybody and everybody across a variety of weights. He was also a hilarious character and his post-fight interviews are some of the most hilarious you'll ever see in boxing.

"I got milk baby! I got milk! Don King kiss my ass!"

How are you going to celebrate James? "Burger King!!!!"

Gas man.

walshb

FTA69 wrote: »

Definitely James Toney for me. Not only was he one of the most technically skilled boxers of the modern era, he was also tough as nails and up for fighting anybody and everybody across a variety of weights. He was also a hilarious character and his post-fight interviews are some of the most hilarious you'll ever see in boxing.

"I got milk baby! I got milk! Don King kiss my ass!"

How are you going to celebrate James? "Burger King!!!!"

Gas man.

I can't think of a more relaxed and confident fighter. He feared nobody. Never ever looked flustered or worried or shaken up. Add this to his amazing natural fighting ability. Could be sluggish and uninterested at times, but even then he never looked to be dominated or beaten up. Jones just beat him because he's Jones. Yes, Lebedev gave him a sound beating. But Toney is and was a shell at that fight.

You know, thinking about it, I cannot see a committed and in shape Toney ever getting stopped or knocked out by any man in history, no matter what weight Toney weighs. He is/was virtually impossible to stop/KO.

leonidas83

Jake Lamotta, a determined & gritty fighter with a great heart but a complete nutcase & scumbag out of the ring

FTA69

walshb wrote: »

I can't think of a more relaxed and confident fighter. He feared nobody. Never ever looked flustered or worried or shaken up. Add this to his amazing natural fighting ability. Could be sluggish and uninterested at times, but even then he never looked to be dominated or beaten up. Jones just beat him because he's Jones. Yes, Lebedev gave him a sound beating. But Toney is and was a shell at that fight.

You know, thinking about it, I cannot see a committed and in shape Toney ever getting stopped or knocked out by any man in history, no matter what weight Toney weighs. He is/was virtually impossible to stop/KO.

People talk about Whittaker and Mayweather's defense, and they're spot on in doing so but Toney is something else altogether in that sphere. If any fighter exemplifies the scientific nature of boxing it's Toney, a man who through sheer skill, guile, footwork and technique (not athleticism) often comprehensivley defeated larger and younger opponents e.g. Jirov. Coupled with this he seemed to have a naturally high gas-tank (considering his notorious laziness) and an absolutely iron-chin.

Even Roy Jones said that Toney was his toughest ever opponent: "I just wanted to bang on his ugly pin head but I couldn't catch him flush cos' he so sneaky!"

Freddie Roach at one stage said he was "the most naturally talented I've ever seen" but was lazy as sin and while he would spar twenty rounds in a row he'd rather die than go for a run every morning.

He's one of boxing's great characters, that's for sure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl50iVr25R8

walshb

FTA69 wrote: »

People talk about Whittaker and Mayweather's defense, and they're spot on in doing so but Toney is something else altogether in that sphere. If any fighter exemplifies the scientific nature of boxing it's Toney, a man who through sheer skill, guile, footwork and technique (not athleticism) often comprehensivley defeated larger and younger opponents e.g. Jirov. Coupled with this he seemed to have a naturally high gas-tank (considering his notorious laziness) and an absolutely iron-chin.

Even Roy Jones said that Toney was his toughest ever opponent: "I just wanted to bang on his ugly pin head but I couldn't catch him flush cos' he so sneaky!"

Freddie Roach at one stage said he was "the most naturally talented I've ever seen" but was lazy as sin and while he would spar twenty rounds in a row he'd rather die than go for a run every morning.

He's one of boxing's great characters, that's for sure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl50iVr25R8

I personally think that Toney's in the pocket defense is the best ever. Pea and Floyd had great balance and leg speed. Toney didn't. Toney just stood right there without really moving his feet at all and let you shoot all day long. Sure, Pea and Floyd can do this as well, but not as good as Toney did it.

As for sheer toughness and chin, well, he had that in abundance too. When he did get hit he sure could take the whack.

People also questioned his fitness. But, the man always made the pace and distance. He was so utterly relaxed that he never used up any real nerevous energy. His training was all about sparring. He wouold use an opponents energy and work rate against them.

Dick phelan

walshb wrote: »

I can't think of a more relaxed and confident fighter. He feared nobody. Never ever looked flustered or worried or shaken up. Add this to his amazing natural fighting ability. Could be sluggish and uninterested at times, but even then he never looked to be dominated or beaten up. Jones just beat him because he's Jones. Yes, Lebedev gave him a sound beating. But Toney is and was a shell at that fight.

You know, thinking about it, I cannot see a committed and in shape Toney ever getting stopped or knocked out by any man in history, no matter what weight Toney weighs. He is/was virtually impossible to stop/KO.

it really is a pity that James was so flippin lazy because when he was motivated he was out of this world in terms of sheer boxing genius had he not been so lazy he would have been on the same level as ray leonard or robinson but his laziness and lack of drive keeps him out of my top ten of all time

walshb

Dick phelan wrote: »

it really is a pity that James was so flippin lazy because when he was motivated he was out of this world in terms of sheer boxing genius had he not been so lazy he would have been on the same level as ray leonard or robinson but his laziness and lack of drive keeps him out of my top ten of all time

On his day he was every bit as impressive as SRL. SRL had some off days too. They both had their strengths. Persoanlly at peak I prefer to watch James in action.

Henno30

El Tornado de Tijuana

Johner

Paulie Malignaggi. Been a huge fan of his all the way through his career, most people I know hate him.

walshb

Johner wrote: »

Paulie Malignaggi. Been a huge fan of his all the way through his career, most people I know hate him.

Comes across to me as likable. Horrible to watch box, but likable outside the ring, and very articulate.

Dick phelan

walshb wrote: »

Comes across to me as likable. Horrible to watch box, but likable outside the ring, and very articulate.

Yeah would agree have seen him doing some punditry and always speaks with a lot of knowledge and sense and points out things beyond the ovious as for the fighting style it was always going to be horrible to watch he cant exactly get himself into a tear up and always has to win on points anyway as a character i always think he comes across as a nice guy

clubwelly

Jesus I remember when I started reading posts on this forum. I cuda put the life savings on Walshb saying Toney!!

endswell

valero

gene_tunney

Toney's defence is very good but overrated. Mayweather and Whitaker were on another level. Toney rolled a lot of shots but caught an awful lot of glancing blows, but because his chin is granite people never picked up on it. If his defence was as good as people said then he wouldn't be so extensively brain-damaged.

gene_tunney

Also, it's a huge myth that an in-shape Toney was unstoppable.

1. RJJ beat him comprehensively
2. Dave Tiberi beat him soundly, Toney was awarded a complete robbery
3. Draw against the bum Sanderline Williams
4. Squeaked by numerous bums with SDs and MDs
5. Montell Griffin beat him

For all these fights he was in shape and at his natural weight

His unique, aesthetically pleasing style made him seem better than he was.

Dick phelan

endswell wrote: »

valero

Do you mean as a fighter because i think everyone loves him from a fighting point of view but outside the ring i dont see how anyone could like him truth is he was a total scumbag outside the ring

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Also, it's a huge myth that an in-shape Toney was unstoppable.

1. RJJ beat him comprehensively
2. Dave Tiberi beat him soundly, Toney was awarded a complete robbery
3. Draw against the bum Sanderline Williams
4. Squeaked by numerous bums with SDs and MDs
5. Montell Griffin beat him

For all these fights he was in shape and at his natural weight

His unique, aesthetically pleasing style made him seem better than he was.

Floyd too took a fair few glancing blows. Toney's D was solid, unique and innate. In the pocket and right in front of you all the time. Never really used movement with his feet. Feet were always a bit heavy. Cemented.

Not sure anyone claims an in shape and committed Toney is unstoppable, but just because you are in shape does not mean that you always perform at your best. We can all have "off days". Mental and physical well being need to be spot on. Sometimes a fighter just hasn' the same level of passion/interest for a fight. It then shows in the physical perormance.

Big Ears

gene_tunney wrote: »

Also, it's a huge myth that an in-shape Toney was unstoppable.

1. RJJ beat him comprehensively
2. Dave Tiberi beat him soundly, Toney was awarded a complete robbery
3. Draw against the bum Sanderline Williams
4. Squeaked by numerous bums with SDs and MDs
5. Montell Griffin beat him

For all these fights he was in shape and at his natural weight

His unique, aesthetically pleasing style made him seem better than he was.

I know I'll likely be out on my own here but I disaree with FTA69's assertion that Toney comprehensively beat Jirov. I personally thought the Tiger edged it by a point (I haven't watched it in ages but I've seen it about 3 times and come to that conclusion each time). Whether you had Toney winning or not though, the scoring was an absolute joke in that fight. 117-109, 116-110, 117-109.....those judges need shooting.

In his later days Toney also got an absolute gift up at Heavyweight vs Fres Oquendo.

walshb

Big Ears wrote: »

I know I'll likely be out on my own here but I disaree with FTA69's assertion that Toney comprehensively beat Jirov. I personally thought the Tiger edged it by a point (I haven't watched it in ages but I've seen it about 3 times and come to that conclusion each time). Whether you had Toney winning or not though, the scoring was an absolute joke in that fight. 117-109, 116-110, 117-109.....those judges need shooting.

In his later days Toney also got an absolute gift up at Heavyweight vs Fres Oquendo.

The scores were not a joke. Many of the rds were close and quite subjective. Hence wide margins can exist fairly. I never get this view that if a fight is ultra close in each rd that the scores MUST reflect this? Why?

The Toney-Jirov fight was close. An argument could be made for a Jirov win. I had Toney a close winner.

walshb

Dick phelan wrote: »

Do you mean as a fighter because i think everyone loves him from a fighting point of view but outside the ring i dont see how anyone could like him truth is he was a total scumbag outside the ring

A crude fighter. I didn't enjoy his style or fights. Nasty piece of work outside the ring.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

The scores were not a joke. Many of the rds were close and quite subjective. Hence wide margins can exist fairly. I never get this view that if a fight is ultra close in each rd that the scores MUST reflect this? Why?

I'll wade in here-I don't remember the fight so this is general not specific, but in a fight that many rounds are close the rounds can go either way-The most obvious thing that will happen is the more well known fighter gets the nod and not even out of badness, it's simply natural to watch the fighter you know more and especially in a close fight.

It's a human flaw and therefore a scoring flaw. this is where draw rounds would be better used.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

I'll wade in here-I don't remember the fight so this is general not specific, but in a fight that many rounds are close the rounds can go either way-The most obvious thing that will happen is the more well known fighter gets the nod and not even out of badness, it's simply natural to watch the fighter you know more and especially in a close fight.

It's a human flaw and therefore a scoring flaw. this is where draw rounds would be better used.

But I don't see why it has to be termed a flaw. If you are honest and judge every rd of a very close fight why is a score of, for example, 120-108 a flaw? If fighter A gets your nod in each rd, why can you not award him all the rds 10-9. Fighre B could get the nod of someone else, and both could be fair scores.

Also: Being well known should have nothing to do with it. Look at Oscar. One of the world's most bankable athletes in the 90s. He did not get the nod in two of his biggest fights in 1999 and 2000 against Trinidad and Mosley respectively. Trinidad was not near as bankable of known as Oscar. Mosley was not as bankable or known. Both those fights were close fights that could be argued either way.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

. this is where draw rounds would be better used.

Aren't draw rds available to the judges? 10-10, or 9-9 etc.

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

But I don't see why it has to be termed a flaw. If you are honest and judge every rd of a very close fight why is a score of, for example, 120-108 a flaw? If fighter A gets your nod in each rd, why can you not award him all the rds 10-9. Fighre B could get the nod of someone else, and both could be fair scores.

Also: Being well known should have nothing to do with it. Look at Oscar. One of the world's most bankable athletes in the 90s. He did not get the nod in two of his biggest fights in 1999 and 2000 against Trinidad and Mosley respectively. Trinidad was not near as bankable of known as Oscar. Mosley was not as bankable or known. Both those fights were close fights that could be argued either way.

Maybe by Trinidad's family and Mosley's too, cos they're about the only people who thought they won.
Those fights were not close.

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

A crude fighter. I didn't enjoy his style or fights. Nasty piece of work outside the ring.

Valero certainly was not crude. That's probably the most overused word on boxing forums. Up until quite recently Canelo Alvarez was still being described as "crude"???? Duran for years was descibed as a 'slugger', etc.

Real crude fighters would be Rocky Marciano and a hell of a lot of the earlier heavyweights, especially the white ones.

I loved watching Valero. He was relentless, but didn't take that much punishment. Terrible tragedy what happened.

endswell

Valero got a huge amount of stick no matter what he did. If people didn't have issues with how he fought in the ring, it was always qualified with what a basttard he was outside of it. He's been slated here a few times before too. Defo tragic what happened; serious psychiatric issues too; motorbike accident, brain clot, and difficulty finding places for fights just added to the extremes that made him up, combined with the conspiracy theories surrounding his and his wife's deaths as well as Hugo Chavez's support for his innocence, however bizarre.

gona watch this again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=471aJa3hhGM

walshb

megadodge wrote: »

Maybe by Trinidad's family and Mosley's too, cos they're about the only people who thought they won.
Those fights were not close.

mega, no way. The 2000 Mosley-Oscar fight was razor close. Are you thinking of their 2nd bout? I had Oscar the winner in the Trinidad fight, but seriously, giving away the last 3 rds hurt him badly. I wouldn't call the result a robbery.