Ricky Hatton deserves the utmost respect.....

Calzaghe makes me a mad Hut!

 

agreed

 

This ^

 

The Celtic alliance are back ::

 

Baloney

 

I think Hatton could've been perceived just as highly as Calzaghe if he'd taken Joe's careful approach to match-making. But he didn't.

 

Calzaghe lost multiple rounds (taken as points beneath 120 & rounded up or down to a whole number) against the following

Eubank : average of 3 across the cards.

Reid: average of 6 across cards

Starie: average of 2 across cards

Woodhall: average of 3 across cards

Brewer: average of 2 across cards

Salem: average of 3 across cards

Bika: average of 3 across cards

Kessler: average of 4 across cards

Hopkins: average of 5 across cards

Jones: average of 2 across cards

Hatton lost multiple rounds on the cards against three opponents in title fights

Tzsyu: average of 4 across the cards

Magee: average of 4 across the cards

&

Floyd, who outclassed him.

Every other fight was essentially a whitewash on the cards.

Just some results and context to add to the debate. (not saying the above does any more than that).

 

'Word'.

 

Slice, without reference to pure subjectivity, make your reasoned case for Calzaghe, please.

 

Our Day Will Come:warning::warning:

 

Hatton was a lot like Duran. Both dominated their own weight class against solid (but not great opposition) and got badly beaten when they stepped up in weight and fought the very best. Both had ugly yet effective style. Duran had the longer career but Hatton had less excuses

 

On this one, things will only get worse. Posterity's defining image of Calzaghe is him beating two legends and retiring in glory, Hatton's is him on his back, unconscious. That's what people see when the names come up.


Fuck Joe Calzaghe.

 

Yeah, exactly.:NotThink:

 

So we agree on that Calzaghe is better than either?

 

Not really, no.

 

opcorn:

 

It Doesn't matter, for we know the truth and it shall free us

Calzaghe fought a bunch of trash and then did a "sweatin' to the oldies" routine on his two most notable opponents... one of them an old man with a cynical, molasses-paced style determined by age

the other a shot punching bag that had once been the best int he world

 

::

 

Calzaghe had tried to set up a Hopkins fight years before Hatton fought Zoo. He was also past his own best when be beat Hopkins, who has since gone on to knock in the dicks of Pavlik and Pascal, the latter a feat witnessed by salivating, sartorially challenged Saskatoon's up in Candida.

 

:giggle:

Jeff Lacy was even money with Calzaghe, in fact most Americans thought Lacy would expose the Welshman (XPLOSIVE among others). Think what you want about Lacy now, at the time he was undefeated seen as a killer. I wouldn't say that was a "careful" fight. Kessler was no where near careful either, neither was Eubank or Old Man Hopkins.

Agree that Calzaghe left it too late to start fighting all the names, but better late than never.

 

Calzaghe was coming off his two very best performances. I don't know when Joe's best was if it wasn't late in his career (once his slappy-volume style had fully evolved). And Hopkins stark age related strengths and weaknesses have been touched upon ad naseum.

(Joe's attempts to get Hops in the ring earlier (genuine or otherwise) make a reasonable case for hating him less : not a good one for him being a better fighter.)

 

Yet they all sit here now and say they always knew that Lacy was overrated. OK.

 

The nuance of the above is always missed... People didn't think Lacy was "even money" because they thought he was GOOD... they thought he was "even money" because Calzaghe was MEDIOCRE

Think about it, the win that basically defined him came against a one-dimensional, barely talented slugger whose best win came against a shot Robin Reid (yes, ROBIN fucking REID, as if he was worth a shit to begin with) ... that same one-dimensional slug never won another real fight again (he hadn't won any beforehand, either)

Everything about Calzaghe is preposterously overrated... I laugh when people say he wasn't a slapper... oh really? well how the fuck does the totally chinless and basically washed-up Charles Brewer take his shots for 12 rounds? If he was any kind of puncher, he would have gotten Brewer out of there... He hit him often enough, that's for sure

everybody brings up Kessler like he was so fucking special, that also escapes me

 

Dude, Mate, Geezer.....

I was only responding to the FALSE notion that Calzaghe didn't "man up" and fight anyone who was a threat. That he was overly protected blah blah.

In that regard, the Lacy fight is evidence to the contrary.

 

MUZSE picked Kessler to beat Calzaghe for example (Yes I tend to remember who mad epicks in fights). Kessler was seen as very good. no one said he was an ATG or anything, just that he was a formidable opponent.

 

Sure. But again, I'd imagine Joe and Enzo took proper time to watch Lacy's tapes and that they'd have come to a pretty accurate opinion of how good he was. The perception of the risk was bigger than the actual risk and I'm sure they knew it very well.

But yeah, I know what you're saying and I guess we're arguing in different debates - I'm still arguing about how good Joe was, you're pointing out that he wasn't as cowardly as I sometimes make him out to be, which is probably true.

I just dislike how his career turned out & how much that's benefited him, even if it wasn't all deliberate. (and I find Hatton's the perfect parallel case to shine light on that)

 

Joe was slipping a bit. Come on. He was well past 30 by then and wasn't living the cleanest of lives. Hopkins is the current, reigning champ at 175. Joe moved UP a divison, with no tune-up, and beat him, 3 years ago.

 

That fight is a very good win, and an example of Joe taking on a legit risk.:Thumbs: No asterisks against that one, at all. That wins judged just right.

 

Sure but how different is that to most fights? I'm sure Leonard and his team looked at Duran struggling with DeJesus at 135lbs and decided to fight him for an easy paday over a legendary name that woul dbe out of his depth at 147lbs. Yet all a y'all give Leonard credit for having big balls because he took on Duran.

 

What evidence that he was slipping, though? He was coming off by far his best win to date and had swept the later rounds. When prior do you think he'd have beaten Kessler more convincingly?

IMO, if he had slipped a bit physically he had compensated for that by perfecting a unique style. Like Hopkins, Lewis, Vitali who peaked past 30, too.

The 'moving up' thing....come on, man :dunno: