Pacquiao will tear Hatton apart...

::

 

I'm not comparing Trinidad and Lacy as individual fighters, just as in the fact they both had alot of hype and were big punching betting favourites over the respective opponents, who were seen as stepping stones on the way to Lacy/Trinidad's unstoppable march to greatness. For the record I knew Hopkins would beat Tito, and I was actually surprised Lacy was a favourite over Calzaghe, I didn't see what the hype was about back then and I still don't.

I say right now you might be right about opponents, Trinidad could be a bigger win, but what if Kessler goes on to dominate and become a legend himself? Then it might not seem that way. To be honest I was never that sold on Trinidad myself and I think Kessler is a better overall fighter but I can see why the majority would favour Tito. It's subjective anyway, but as for your argument over the reigns of Ottke and Calzaghe, Calzaghe beat all common opponents much more convincingly than Ottke, and though it took a Fuuuuucking long time, he DID step it up, which Ottke didn't. Plus Hopkins reign, as i said, was filled with shite as well, yet everyone considers him an ATG.

 

Tito has accomplished much more as a fighter than Kessler and is better that him.

 

Maybe

 

i agree that tito has accomplished more, without question, but tito isn't the better fighter.

guarantee you as well, Calzaghe would have battered ANY version of Tito

 

thats not saying a whole lot, he is a much bigger guy

And as of right now, Tito IS better than Kessler

accomplishments are 90% of it

if we ignored accomplishment, we could say "Mark Breland was better than Tito"

 

im not arguing that, all im saying is, kesslers career isn't over yet.

 

agreed

 

good ::

 

:laughing:

 

Those guys you listed had one thing Calzaghe never did- they had at least one equal fighter in their generation to fight and to solidify their greatness.

In essence, that is to punish Calzaghe by a lack of worthy opponents. Is it Joe's fault that he cleaned out the division and that none were his equal?

The fighters you listed were all time greats. Is that the same (or should it be the same) as a great fighter?

MTF

 

Pick a different weight and make the same argument- a division above middleweight, for example. Lesser weights always turn out well matched, highly skilled guys.

And Hamed is far lesser than Calzaghe. No argument can be made to support a claim that he is great whilst Joe is not. Joe won his defining fights. Hamed lost his single such fight.

MTF

 

agreed about Hamed, I was saying it because some feel strongly that he was great and that his lifestyle exacerbated his decline and influenced his loss to MAB (personally, I dont subscribe to this theory)

in my mind, Calzaghe is "greater" than hamed

I would choose Light Heavyweight, but that has been pretty much a wasteland since Michael Spinks vacated:: (save for Roy Jones, of course)

Heavyweight however (not even counting the last 5 years! ) :

Lewis
Holyfield
Bowe
Moorer
Mercer
Foreman
Ruddock
Tyson


still trumps the 168 list

 

if your division sucks, then you ought to seek fights against guys in other divisons... Calzaghe attmpted this in 03 or 04 with hopkins and for that I give him credit, but why not go after Jones and take the lesser money? Jones was the big fish and even a competetive loss to him would have done wonders for Joe's rep... and really, Jones deserved to make the bigger bucks for such a matchup... Calzaghe seemed quite content to be a talented fighter ruling a terrible division fighting almost exclusively in his own backyard... if that faggot Ottke isnt immune to that criticism, than Joe shouldn't be either

Each of the fighters I named not only owned far deeper divisions than Joe but they all sought matches againsts top champions from other divisions, thats why they are great

I think of Joe more along the lines of an Antonio Cervantes, a guy who was excellent for a long time ruling a generally weak divison... I give him props as an excellent fighter, but I wouldnt call either guy great

 

:: at Calzaghe being "not much better than Ottke".

Ottke fucking SUCKED, he was a joke of a champion, and it's a joke that he retired undefeated. Half his defenses were questionable decisions, he simply wasn't a very good fighter.

Eubank was an excellent fighter, without a doubt. It's a shame that vegetable-ising Watson took a LOT of steam off him as a fighter. Calzaghe HANDLED Eubank.

I don't like Kessler, I never have. I just don't really like his style or anything about him. But he is a very good fighter. His competition hasn't been great, but he's dominated everyone he's fought, including Andrade.

You can't even compare Ottke and Calzaghe, they are in different leagues.

Ottke was rubbish, he should have lost a handful of his decisions, and the best win of his career is KOing Mundine.

That hardly compares to Calzaghe beating almost all his same defenses more convincingly, plus beating Eubank, Lacy, Kessler, Nard and Jones. I mean FFS, come on ::

Calzaghe procrastinated, and thereby built up a lot of doubt and resentment to him and his career. If he had stepped up in class years earlier, nobody would be having this discussion, because he truly is one of the best fighters of his generation.

And nobody "eats Joe alive". Not even prime Roy. Would I pick Roy to win? Yes, but Joe would be a tougher fight for him than anybody else. Joe is too tough, too crafty, too clever, too quick and too unpredictable to be an easy win for ANYONE.

And the Nard that beat Tito for example, only has a higher workrate than this Hopkins. As bizarre as it is, Hopkins really isn't shot. A shot fighter doesn't school Pavlik and Tarver. Fuck, a shot fighter doesn't have better reflexes and timing than a young champion like Pavlik.

Despite this Nard having a lower workrate, he has a few years more cunning added to his cap, and is still fast.

Even against Calzaghe - a very fast super middle - Nard still looked damn quick.

One of the tell tale signs of a shot fighter is the old adage "He can no longer pull the trigger". Well fuck, Hopkins sees an opening and he can pull the trigger in a nanosecond, and that right hand has hit it's target before the opponent even knows what happened. He is still very quick to pull the trigger, and still has fast hands, especially on his lead right.

Roy was shot obviously, that's why I don't even bother discussing that win.

Still, I would pick this shot version of Roy to WHUP any version of Ottke. Seriously.

Cdogg it's clear you just don't like Joe much, so we'll leave it at that, but you're criminally underrating him.

And let me reiterate - this is coming from someone who rooted for Mario fucking Veit to beat Joe. I've never liked him, but there came a time when I had to give him his dues, he is a GREAT fighter, not a "very good" one, a great one.

 

You underrate Ottke a bit, but otherwise a great post:bears:

 

You are missing the point... I have made it quite clear that I think Calzaghe was the better fighter of the two... thats not being debated

its that he was "GREAT"

NO, simply NO

EXCELLENT? yes

a hall of famer? absolutley

GREAT? no

 

What's more laughable.

Picking Hatton over Mayweather or saying that a fight is such a complete mismatch Hatton is going to die in the ring against Tszyu and he ends up stopping Tszyu. :atu:

 

You have the balls to talk about me having hard ons for fighters.

I like TWO UK fighters. Hatton and Calzaghe.

You on the other hand are a pseudo PC white guy who likes to belittle Asians and Hispanics but make up for it by sucking every single black dick you see. The darker the better. The more criminal and thuggish the better. I already called you out on this several times.

If Calzaghe was black and a wifebeating wanna be hip hop thug he'd be your hero.

artie:

 

I NEVER said Calzaghe's resume was better.

I said I would LOVE to hear you go fighter for fighter over Mayweather's career. You KNOW you would look like a fool glorifying him moving up and fighting Brusseles and Sharmba Mitchell after you criticized Calzaghe for moving up and fighting an old Hopkins.

Hopkins was coming off a good win over Tarver and then went on to absolutely school Pavlik. Yet you only see him as a 44 year old washed up man.

Maywaeather moved up and fought Hanry Brusseles and Sharmba Mitchell (who went on to get destroyed by Paul Williams). How the hell is that better than moving up to fight Hopkins again? ld:

Mayweather beats DLH and you and Reed were jumping up and down doing 360s like you were at a Def Comedy Jam. DLH goes on to get absolutely crushed by Pac coming up from 135. DLH's loss DOESN't make Floyd's win any less in your eyes. And Hopkins beating Pavlik DOESN'T make Joe's win any better in your eyes. Yeah, you're not biased AT ALL. :atu:

Like I said, if Calzaghe were black and a hip hop thugster, he'd be your #3 hero behind Sweet P Crackhead and Floyd Wifebeater.
:mj:

 

Didnt I already shit all over this bullshit argument in TAA?

Yet you still bring it up like it is a fact

My favorite current fighters are Pacquiao, Marquez, Hopkins

An asian guy, a mexican guy and a black guy

I have already explained my favorite all time fighters in that TAA thread, so I am not going to waste my time listing them again

 

A pick that was echoed by many at the time

Tszyu quit a fight that was still winnable

Hatton exceeded expectations

simple as that

 

Under those condistions I should get major props.

There was never a time when I thought Hatton would lose and I took it from people like Reed and Steve Dave about how my fighter was going to get wiped out and i'd be laughed at and all that.

:bears:

 

I hate Floyd Mayweather, I have rooted against him in almost every fight he has ever been in... I hate the guy... yet another falsehood from you, nothing surprising there\


Why would I need to bring up Brusseles or Mitchell when those arent even blips on the radar of Mayweather's career??

How about kicking the shit out Genaro Hernandez? the two round annihlation of Angel manfredy? the almost comically dominating KO of Diego Corrales? how about two wins ( thought I thought he should have lost a close one the first time) against Castillo? KO win over Hatton?

Look I have left out several notable wins and already :
Mayweather > Calzaghe

Like I said, I hate Floyd Mayweather but to suggest that he isnt clearly a better fighter with a better resume than Joe is just wrong

And since you are so interested in rehashing my picks, maybe you can go to the one for Mayweather/Hoya where I said (to the best of my memory) that "Floyd will be too quick ultimately and will win by using his defense to avoid punishment while landing enough quick shots to control the pace. I dont think DLH has the speed anymore to deal with him, BUT I WILL BE ROOTING FOR THE OLD GUY ANYWAY"


The Def Comedy Jam??? Why dont you just make some jokes about Fried Chicken, Watermelon, Large White women and Slam Dunking while you are at it?

As for the Hopkins argument... I think Joe's win was excellent and he deserves credit for it, but I think a Bernard Hopkins from a few years ago is a markedly better fighter than the one Calzaghe fought... I also dont give a whole lot of credence to the Pavlik fight because Pavlik was fighting at a weight he never fought at before or since and because his flaws are ripe for Bernard's style...If that is Bernard Hopkins 7 or 8 years ago, Pavlik doesnt see the 10th round IMO

 

props to you, it was a good pick

now why dont you address the blatant lies you have told about me in your posts in this and other threads and your ridiculous signature which is so unlike me its insane

 

You also claim to be a Julio Cesar Chavez fan yet I have never seen someone talk more disrespectful shit about Chavez than you have over the years. You even brought him up in the "When did you stop liking a fighter" thread then claimed to be a big fan of his afterwards. Here's a fucking hint, Penfold. When you STOP liking a fighter, you're not considered a fan of his any more. :boohoo:

 

I'll take down the sig BUT I put it there because you talked to me like I'm some buffoon who knows nothing about music. I'm not some punk kid screaming about Grren Day and Nirvana. Buffoons don't listen to the bands I listen to. Then pulled a Karl Hegman on me. And you KNOW you did. :atu:

 

I did not pull a Hegman

Music is not boxing:nono:

 

i actually think Calzaghes style could be the perfect answer to Floyds

 

Dude, that is the only thread you keep bringing up

Where is all of this other "disrespectful" shit?

unless you mean this hideous and disrespectful tirade I went on recently:

It is a great shame that Chavez has been rewritten as an old crybaby and quitter

He is one of my all time favorites

It may shock people who know me and my love of the legendary "Sweet Pea", but I was rooting for Julio in that fight

He was a masterful fighter in his prime... the real Chavez was the young man we can see picking apart Mario Martinez, knocking the stuffing out of Roger Mayweather, brutally beating the fight out of Ruben Castillo, hammering the tough as hell Jose Luis Ramirez at close range, destroying Edwin Rosario in spectacularly one-sided fashion, roaring back from the brink to stop an inspired Meldrick Taylor (say whatever you want about the stoppage, the comeback was tremendous)

He was a champion into the 90s and still recorded some impressive wins (his 1992 raping of Hector Camacho remains one of my favorite moments in boxing history) but the real Chavez plied his trade during the 1980s, that is when he was at his best, that is when he was hungry. There was no quit in him then, no laziness. He was fire in the ring but with the icey cool of a pure technician...

he was the the living definition of "heavy handed"... in other words, Chavez didnt throw huge knockout punches a la Julian Jackson, where the other gets hit and doesnt feel any pain because his nervous system has been disrupted and he doesnt know he was hit or that the fight is over... no, Chavez was never that kind of puncher. Chavez's punches were extraordinarily hurtful, aimed with precision and designed to cause not the maximum concussive damage but instead the maximum conscious discomfort and pain... he slowly but relentlessly pinpointed his punches to batter the will and energy out of his opponents, like he was torturing them

And what a chin he had! The right hand that Roger Mayweather laid on him in their first fight would have knocked out just about any 130 pounder you'd care to name, it was a bomb and it hit Chavez aquare... most guys would have been on their backs, but Chavez was merely stunned by the punch, regrouped after a few uncomfortable seconds and soon after stopped Uncle Rog... Edwin Rosario was one of the hardest punchers the Lightweight division has ever known and Chavez, despite hsi dominance, was caught with a few hellish right hands and left hooks from Chapo but they had no effect on him

Chavez may have disgraced himself from 1993 to the present with his horrible attitude, lack of desire, poor sportsmanship, sense of entitlement, etc. but it is unfair to use to to denigrate him when he was at his best... he was a truly special fighter, certainly one of the 20 best fighters of all time in my opinion
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________



OR HOW ABOUT THIS? The "STOP LIKING" thread

I thought Chavez was the embodiment of toughness, the purest fighting specialist there was. In his prime, he was just beautiful to watch, he just overcame everyone, he wore them out, slowly battering the strength out of them... He always seemed like a quiet, subdued kind of guy, prideful but humble... even when he bitched after the Whitaker fight, I dismissed it as a great fighter who wasnt used to losing verbalizing his frustrations and it didn't bother me much (though the verdict sure did and still does to this day, even though i was rooting for JCC-- as much as that may surprise people who know me around here)

Then came the Frankie Randall fight and his totally classless display after it... it was a sign of things to come, unfortunately... Chavez permanantley damaged his legacy and his general popularity from that fight onward in his career... I still think he was one of the great ones in his day, but I dont have too much respect for him as a person

Although I am objective about his talent and think he is a master boxer, Floyd Mayweather makes my stomach turn as a human being... heavenly abilities wasted on a arrogant, mouthy, woman-punching thug (:laughing: delicious irony here in this thread)


As you can clearly see, I make it clear that he is still one of my favorite FIGHTERS EVER, I just dont care too much for the person he became... I mean do YOU think Chavez is a good person, Caligula? I have expressed the same feelings about Whitaker as well, except more because of his outside-the-ring troubles


__________________


How about some more VILE things I have said about El Gran Campeon Mexicano??

In a thread about MOST WELL ROUNDED FIGHTERS:

"Another guy that comes to mind in his younger days was Julio Cesar Chavez--did everything superbly well"

__________________

Name ONE example of me "talking shit" about Chavez... and to me "TALKING SHIT" means unfair criticism or plain untruths

you havent got a leg to stand on... I still love Chavez... the REAL chavez, the one was so brilliant in the 80s and early 90s... not the bitter, sore loser he became

just like I love Whitaker.. the BOXER... the genius in his prime who fought EVERYBODY and made it look easy... not the sad crack addict he became