Pacquiao will tear Hatton apart...

I'd love to hear you break down Mayweather's resume with the same scrutiny you did with Calzaghe. :cheer:

 

Dude, Mayweather's Resume SHITS on Calzaghe's...& he DOESN'T have GERIATRIC Versions of FORMER Greats on his Shit Either...SURELY, U're NOT Insinuating that Calzaghe has a BETTER Resume???...



REED:mj:

 

What a suprise, another United Kingdom treat that you have a hard-on for::

Are you serious???

You want to honestly debate who has the better resume???

 

No, once mayweather moved up to 140, go ahead and move fighter by fighter just like you did with Calzaghe.

Like I said. I'd love to hear it. :bears:

artie:

 

Give me an argument of why Mayweather should be considered P4P #1 fighter RIGHT NOW.

 

So... skip half his career and then start comparing?

 

Mayweather SHOULDN'T B Considered Lb 4 Lb # 1 Right Now...He WASTED ALL of 2008 & RIGHTFULLY Lost the Top Spot...But what Does ANY of this have to Do w/THE FACT that Floyd's Resume Absolutely SHITS on Joe Calzaghe's???...


REED:dunno:

 

Not Only That, but Fast Forward thru 3/4 of Calzaghe's Career & just Focus on the END...


REED::

 

Calzaghe is very good. Notice I didn't even mention the Jones win, because it's more or less meaningless.

But seriously, Calzaghe is "not that good" ::. So were everyone complete idiots for listing him as top 3 P4P before he retired?


Calzaghe slaps, and fights to the level of his opposition, but he was a formidable fighter. An incredibly hard style to solve, an iron chin, fast hands, excellent reflexes, a great boxing brain, a high workrate for a super middle.

This version of hopkins has a lower workrate, but is far craftier than the younger hopkins, for example the Nard that Roy beat.

Honestly I think Joe beats a young Nard too. You have to remember, Calzaghe was no spring chicken when he beat Nard either, mid to late thirties.

Don't forget the Eubank win too. Eubank was an excellent fighter. He changed after the watson fight, but he could still fight, and he wasn't even shot when he fought Joe. See the Thompson fights afterwards, he could still fight even just before he retired.

Joe doesn't have the greatest resume, but he is absolutely a great fighter, and the #1 super middleweight in boxing history.

And seriously, this is coming from a guy that's never even been a Calzaghe fan, and only came to appreciate him in recent years. I used to hate him actually.

And by the way, nobody in their right mind thought Sven was as good as Calzaghe. Sven was nothing, Joe would have slapped him silly.

 

Who said any of that?

Once again, you avoid real intellectual confrontation because you have no case, you change the subject to avoid being clearly exposed for what you are -- a loudmouthed fool

Why dont you put that in your sig?

At least it's an actual quote from me

 

its pacs fight to lose, if he fights the right fight then he wins easy, if he fights the wrong fight hatton has a chance and it becomes difficult. it really doesnt matter what hatton does because he wont bring anything different. it should be a good one though.

 

you liked the lithium riff though didnt u, so thats ok opcorn:

 

when I say "not that good" I mean in the context of GREAT fighters... not in general

he also did not have an iron chin, he was dropped and hurt on a number of occassions and not by anyone who was all that formidable in the punching department... Juan LaPorte, Marvin Hagler, Julio Cesar Chavez, those are IRON chins

Eubank had lost two of his previous 5 and hadnt beaten anyone notable in years and was an overrated fighter to begin with!

When I say the younger Hopkins I am not talking about the relative novice of 1993, I am talking about the dominant fighter of 1999-2003 era... if you think today's Bernard Hopkins is in the same league as that guy, you're crazy

And Roy Jones would have eaten Calzaghe alive at 168 in his prime

Being the "Greatest Super Middleweight" isn't much of an accomplishment... it is a historically ATROCIOUS division that has seen only a handful of elite fighters, most of whom made a one or two fight visit there... Its like when people call Finito Lopez "The Greatest Strawweight in boxing history", big deal!

Anyone who thinks Ottke was as good or better is crazy??? let's compare the title reigns...

Calzaghe defended against Brewer who had lost twice already to SVEN OTTKE

He defended against Byron Mitchell (who floored him) who had already lost to SVEN OTTKE

Calzaghe defended against Robin Reid, Omar Sheika, Peter Manfredo Jr.

Sven Ottke defended against Arman Krajnc, Robin Reid, Thomas Tate, Anthony Mundine

The title reigns are virtually interchangeable... the main difference being that Ottke doesnt have victories over two old guys

I stand by what I say, Calzaghe was a very good fighter who had a successful title reign in one of boxing's worst divisions and was not a "Great" fighter

 

Exactly!

 

calzaghe WAS a great fighter. i dont even like him, but he WAS great. Also i believe he would have beaten Bernard at anytime in Bernards career. i also think people are way too quick to write calzaghe off against RJJ, don't get me wrong, RJJ would be a clear favourite but I honestly think Joe had the style to give him absolute hell, and be much more competitive than ANYONE was against prime RJJ.

 

Sven Ottke was GREAT, then too

 

Calzaghe had, at worst, a very good chin. He also had superb recuperative powers- even on the handful of occasions he was dropped he was never once in serious trouble. For a supermiddle over near 50 fights, that demonstrates a very good beard.

Eubanks was diminished when Joe beat him but he was an excellent fighter, especially pre-Watson II. Before that fight he was a ferocious puncher with a granite chin. Afterwards he was a wily, hard punching fighter with a granite chin, and Joe dropped him in the first round despite being 'slappy' en route to a very tough and creditable win. Eubanks showed after that fight that he had plenty of fight left in him (unlike Benn, who really was shot the second Mclellan crumpled in his corner).

If Hopkins was such a lock to beat Calzaghe years earlier, why did he price himself out of the fight scheduled in 2003? The contracts were signed and everything was set but for Hopkins to then decide he wanted double the money had had agreed to have. If there is a doubt about that fight and it's result, the doubt lies with Hopkins, not Calzaghe.

Agreed that Roy beats Joe at 168 but he doesn't 'eat him alive'. Joe would have given a prime Roy the toughest test of his career, without doubt.

Ottke is beyond shit. The comparison between Joe and Sven is defunct for a number of reasons:

1. Ottke was a feather fisted punk. He won about eight of his fights by KO against, largely, the same guys that Joe was stopping. Even Tocker Pudwill went the distance with Ottke. His only meaningful stoppage was Mundine, which is a the shining jewel in Ottke's crappy legacy.

2. Ottke was un-decisionable in Germany and he knew it. He simply spoiled his was to numerous hideous decisions, inlcuding his decision win over Redi- my favourite Ottke victory. If you can, watch that fight on You-Tube. At one stage (I think it's the seventh round), Reid is deducted a point for having the temerity to throw a JAB at Ottke!

3. If Joe was 'stay at home Joe', then Ottke was worse again. He never moved away from his cosy, back poket referees and judges.

Nobody sensible lists the Jones win as a 'marquee win' for Joe. I said beforehand and maintain that the fight was no more than a money making circus and Joe gets nothing bar cash out of that one. But Hopkins is still a top 5 lb-4-lb guy and just beat the best 160lb-er in the world by schooling. Kessler is the consensus top 168lb-er in the world, beating all of the guys Joe is suppoed to have ducked, and Joe outclassed him by the end. Lacy was the supposed next big thing at 168lb and was expected to 'expose' Joe. Instead he got a career ending beatdown.

Eubanks, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins. All four excellent wins and better by streets than anything Ottke did.

If Joe wasn't 'great', then how come almost everyone had him, at LEAST, in the top three lb-4-lb lists at the time of his retirement? Very good fighters don't become one of the top handful of guys in the world. Great fighters do.

MTF

 

My point is that Calzaghe wasnt that much better than Ottke, who was clearly shit

and Felix Trinidad was once NUMBER ONE on the P4P lists despite being a hideously overrated fighter who was mesmerized by footwork and jabs... that doesnt mean much to me, especially these days when knee-jerk reactions govern the "P4P" lists

 

Na Ottke was crap.

They may have fought many of the same opponents, but Calzaghe beat them all much more convincingly.

 

their opponents were all SHITTY

its a shitty, terrible division and it always has been

there are no "great" career super middleweights, just very good ones

 

I disagree

 

Hopkins, Eubanks and Kessler are not shitty.

MTF

 

Hopkins is old as shit, and he battered Pavlik because Pavlik is as dumb as shit

Eubanks was at best very good

Kessler was at best good

And those are the three crowning achievements of Calzaghe's career

I stand by what I say

Duran, Whitaker, Hagler, Monzon, Hearns, Leonard, etc. are GREAT

Calzaghe shouldnt be mentioned in the smae galaxy with any of them

 

Also, whilst we are on...

168 gets bags of shit about how weak it is/has been historically etc etc. Some of it is valid, but you have to consider that 168 is, what, twenty years old as a division? In twenty years, the following guys have been fought (and most held belts or challenged for belts) there or thereabouts:

Eubanks
Benn
Watson
Collins
Mclellan
Jones Jr (arguably at his best at 168)
Hopkins
Johnson
Kessler
Calzaghe
Taylor
Pavlik

In twenty years, and for such a derided division, that aint a bad collection of fighters.

MTF

 

Hopkins age is fairly irrelevent, because he defies normal logic in that respect. He beat Pavlik because, even though he is, what, 43, he is BETTER than the best 160lb-er in the world right now- an erstwhile unbeaten fighter with two W's over Hopkins MW conqueror, Jemaine Taylor.

Eubanks was, at his prime, an elite level fighter.

Kessler is, right now, the best fighter in one of the most competative divisions in the sport. Unbeaten through forty fights save for his loss to Joe. To describe him as a 'good' fighter is nonsense.

Agreed that the others are a level above Calzaghe. But that doesn't mean that they have a monopoly on the word 'great'.

MTF

 

"not much better?" he was MILES better dude, c'mon. it's plain to see. are you telling me Ottke would have beaten Kessler? or the Bernard that fought Joe? Not a chance. Also, if you are going to criticise Calzaghes reign, how can you have Bernard in such high regard? Bernard fought absolute shite for years, after losing his biggest fight prior to that and getting knocked down twice and scraping a draw against a bum from ecuador. then after doing this he got a win dominant win over a one-dimensional guy with heavy hands and alot of hype (Trinidad...Lacy...same thing) which suddenly opened everyones eyes (just like calzaghe). Thing is, after this big win, Hopkins went back to fighting bums or lighter fighters for ages until losing to Jermain, whilst Calzaghe took on Kessler. Are you seriously telling me the opponents Hopkins fought during his lengthy reign are substantially better than Joes? Pssshh

 

Let's compare it to a more historically significant division, such as Featherweight for example

in the last 20 years

Barrera
Morales
Marquez
Hamed
Pacquiao
Paez
Kelley
Villasana
Fenech
Vazquez
Esparragoza
Johnston

4 or 5 of those guys could legitimitely be called "GREAT" (6 if you want to make a case for Hamed)

Out of that Super Middle list, only one GREAT fighter had more than a handful of fights there (Jones Jr.) ... two if you think Calzaghe is great

 

but do you disagree that Calzaghe in no way should ever be considered on the level of those GREAT fighters I named there???

To me, those guys are GREAT fighters

GREAT is reserved for a special few in my eyes

 

Ability-wise Calzaghe is undeniably a great fighter, right uo there with the very best of his generation.

Competition-wise he is not great, although he did everything there was to be done in his division

 

I shit on Trinidad a lot, but to compare him to Lacy is ABSURD!!! C'mon, man!!!!

I havent said anything about Hopkins, have not compared him to any of the greats I mentioned... but Trinidad is a bigger and better win than any of Calzaghe's wins, hands down

And again, I think Ottke SUCKED... but Calzaghe fought basically the same guys or guys on the same level for 10 years... so you cant go from one guy sucking balls and then call another guy GREAT when he fought the same bunch of stiffs

Calzaghe was VERY GOOD and a very good champion

But hes not GREAT

Great is special