What were the major differences between Calzaghes reign at 168...

Inferior resume, not necessarily fighter.

 

Yes, and beating Tarver, Wright and Pavlik.

 

Well Steven,.. if it's resume,.. Calzaghe can dock Tarver, Pavlik and Winky in one swoop with Bernard Hopkins, who was apparently the current Lightheavyweight champ,.. .. (I didn't think so myself,.. Chad Dawson was a guy neither would dare to fight.)

 

When Hopkins was a young pup he fought Roy Jones.

Calzaghe after a long reign actually said he didn't want to fight Roy because he didn't fancy his chances. 7 years later and a completely shot Roy in the equation he went on to fight that corpse and call it his greatest achievement and reason to retire.

That and and tons of accomplishments is probably their biggest difference.

 

Tito sucked but he was Sugar Ray compared to jeff lacy.

It's a fair thread because it's true, the gulf isn't great but Hops' is better for mine. I mean Calzaghe's best win at 168 by a wide distance was Kessler. Who was really one of the most puzzlingly over hyped fighers of my time following boxing. I suspect there was an air of desperation around that time that Calzaghe would go his whole career without a single really meaningful fight and one damn better be built one way or the other. I mean really, who is Mikel Kessler and what exactly makes him a career defining nemesis? Solid win for sure but little more.

Tito, DLH, Johnson, Holmes, Joppy, Eastman, Echols, Brown

Kessler, Old Eubank, Mitchel, Lacy, Brewer, Woodhall, Reid, Veit

It's fair to say the disparity isn't huge, but personally i think it's pretty decisive that Hops' is a little better.

 

Fair point, but surely Hopkins losing twice to a guy who wasn't as good as Kessler has to count for something

 

When Calzaghe said,.. "Years ago he didn't want to know my name, now he wants to be my neighbour" Roy confirmed, that Calzaghe was never in his plans. Thus, to indicate Calzaghe avoided or turned down an offer from Roy is false,.. unlike Hopkins pulling out of the Calzaghe fight in 2002.

However,.. with that said,.. Roy would be a much better American superiority pump-up, if people are still feeling the 'sting' about Calzaghe, that's a thread creation that may ease the pain, instead of trying to make a move with Hopkins,..for it is much more broadly accepted that Roy was a better fighter, with a better overall resume.

 

Hopkins wanted to fight all the welterweights and jr middleweights.

 

Ironically Hopkins waited for Roy to be even more shot before becoming brave enough to fight him and even then did more acting than an Italian Soccer player.

 

De La Hoya... has got to go from that list,.. that fight was just pure capitalism.. that should have been axed as soon as Sturm proved De La Hoya's quality.

 

Suppose, yeah. But given the manner of the losses (contestable) and Hops weight issues Im inclined to be fairly forgiving of them. Especially since Taylor also drew with Wright. Are we so convinced he wasn't as good as Kessler?

I mean I thought he sucked too but he had 3 very close fights with Hopkins & Wright, what's Kessler done?

As I said, it's a fair thread, you make good points. It's not a huge chasm we're talking about by any means.

 

Would you also take into consideration that Tito was ruining the careers of Vargas, Reid and Joppy before being pulled up with wrigged wraps just before he was due out with Hopkins?..

Don't know why you want to degrade Kessler in comparison to Hopkins awesome middleweight rivals,.. he beat Froch who knocked Taylor out, and Andrade who (really) knocked Bute out, but really.. it's 'a b c' shit to go down that route,...what is however quite a suprise is you feel compelled to believe the shortlist of Hopkins middleweight opposition were somehow superior to Kessler?... wtf Hut hut?..

 

Yea exactly, do a poll on here asking who would have won out of Taylor and Kessler in the Super Six and I think it would have been quite one-sided, complete with the obligatory homicide metaphor courtesy of Xplosive. Kessler may not have the name value of Tito or De La Hoya but it doesn't make him less of a challenge at 168.

 

:crafty: I like Hut Hut,.. but,.. to put 'Old' infront of Eubank,..sure, he may have been,.. but Eubank had enough left to give Carl Thompson a good work out,.. he pops DLH onto the Hopkins shortlist,...with no brackets for that one?.. :crafty: ... he knoooows what he's doing,... selective, selective,...

 

BOLLOX.

But...being the gentleman I am, I will merely prep your anus, and allow MeetTheFeebles to drill you senseless on that one.

 

Where's your elaborate contributions elsewhere yar fucken mink,.. here I am fightin' the battle trying to pry me way through the internal struggle of scitzophrenic fragments and knots while you'll have a fucken sun tan..

 

Patience Clarice, Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock.....

 

Hopkins is like the octopus drawn in those old anti-communist cartoons,..

 

Buffalo Calzaghe, about 6'1 168lbs, brown hair brown eyes, used to go by the name slapper joe but now they call him "Mr C"....tell me Jeff, when he fucked your ass, did it harden your nipples?

 

Reservoir dogs?..:notallthere: .. I had been on a roll,..but I can't pick this.

^ 'Clarice' ...well that's straight off the bone,.. when I played the role of Illuminati's psychiatrist awhile back,.. I used some quotes and pictures to accompany the service,... "whaja see Illuminati, whaja see"... :crafty:

 

This is completely false. Hopkins pulled out of the Calzaghe fight after it had been agreed by Showtime and each fighter's promoter.

MTF

 

Why thank you kind Sir. I wasn't going to bother doing this again, but I might as well for the cheap seats:

A teleconference was set up in my office in New York on 30th July 2002, and on the call was myself, Don King who was in the room, Frank Warren and Bernard Hopkins' lawyer, Arnold Joseph. Along with Arnold was a woman named Linda Carter, who was there on behalf of Bernard. We asked Arnold if Bernard wanted to fight Joe Calzaghe and we asked him how much money he would want if he did. The response that we got was $3million and the fight would have to take place in the US.

After a little while scratching our head, we said 'Okay, Done'. Frank Warren agreed on the spot, Don King agreed and we agreed, so as far as we were concerned we were all singing off the one hymn sheet.

Arnold excused himself with Linda and I can only assume it was to call Bernard. Either that day or the next, I'm just not certain about that particular timeframe, they came with a new demand- $6million, double the sum which had been agreed. In addition to the Calzaghe fight, we had offered him $1million to fight Morrade Hakkar, and the winner of that bout to fight Harry Simon. Then he would have had the bout with Joe but when he came back asking for six million, the deal blew up spectacularly. I thought that the Calzaghe-Hopkins was a spectacular prospect but it wasn't to be.

Bernard's pretty shrewd, he's no dummy and has done a wonderful job of self-management in his career, but he had then no desire to fight Joe Calzaghe, that much is pretty clear. Joe gets criticised sometimes for not having fought more big named Americans, but in this case the fault has never rested with him.

Jay Larkin, Showtime TV Vice President of Sports and Event Programming, in No Ordinary Joe, Brian Doogan at p197-98

The idea that Calzaghe ducked Hopkins is completely false.

MTF

 

My Lord, you express it!

And besides, he went on to beat him anyways, before Hopkins beat Pavlik.

It is the one thing I am truly grateful to Kelly for.

 

I don't think Bernard was ducking Calzaghe per se. It seems his beef back then was King's cut, which is why he priced himself out of every lucrative bout during that time. That said, it's a little silly to say Calzaghe was ducking Hopkins. Not when he was ready to sign the contract and come to the US. I don't however agree with you on Jones. Yeah, Calzaghe can say "he didn't want to know me" back then but he's the same guy who admitted in 2003 that he never really had any intentions of fighting Jones. As far as comparing their title reigns, I think Hopkins' is a little better. The victory over Tito looms large and even some of his lesser names weren't too shabby. Echols went on to beat Brewer. Keith Holmes stopped Richie Woodhall. Middleweight was simply a better division.

 

:crafty: Oh no no no, you know aswell as I do if the roles were reversed, this would not do...

As for the a,b,c route,.. There's alot of sons and grand-sons that can be made through this avenue,.. it means nothing, unless, despite losing twice to Taylor, Hops finally claims his victory because he beat Pavlik?, which means "See if this Hops had of fought Taylor" as was touted at the time, suggesting he's a better lightheavyweight than middleweight,.......:crafty: ah,.. ?.. what's the next move in this 'a,b,c' world that we could make here, given this lead of thinking,.. It doesn't work Kenneth, and if it did, then it's to Calzaghe's advantage in the end.

 

Well I agree, I do think that Hopkins was certainly in the wrong with regards to Calzaghe. No two ways about it. And you definitely can't say he avoided Hopkins back in 2002 when he was ready to make it happen. However, I do think Hops MW reign was better than Calzaghe's SMW reign. MW was just a better division. SMW was where people went when they couldn't hack it at 160 (ie, Woodhall, Echols, etc). And they couldn't hack it because Bernard was there.

 

But Kenneth, none of Hops awesome middleweight opponents could do anything at supermiddleweight?, and they couldn't even get into the position to face Calzaghe,.. you have jotted in Echols,.. as far as I remember Echols went on to face Mundine, I remember this, because I wanted Mundine knocked out, very badly, very very badly,.......but he proved to be an incompetant scrub, and I was personally infuriated with Echols overration. Joppy was wrecked in the same manner that Reid and Vargas were by Tito's 'contraversial wrapping methods' that Hops described would 'have been like being hit with a baseball bat', poor bastard, but Hops fought him, and Hop's recieved all the credit in the world,.. "it's alright Joppy, there's a weaker division above you mate, the prize is yours" scribes agreed,...............but it didn't happen Kenneth,.. Syd Vanderpool couldn't beat Lacy for a paper-belt, Glen Johnson couldn't beat Ottke for a paper belt,.. Keith Holmes went backwards and was beaten by Karmazin at jr middleweight,.. There's nothing there Kenneth, they failed against Hops, but failed at supermiddleweight too.

I'm not in here trying to raise Calzaghe on to my shoulders,.. what I'm more concerned with, is the fact that Calzaghe "Fought nuthin' beat nuthin' was an overhyped overprotected European fraud!...die!!!!!" ...by comparison... Hopkins is addressed as 'Legend' like 'Mr' ..cunning, ruthless, masterful genius boxer, p4p top 15 ALL TIME!!.. people have said he has "one of the best resumes going around" ...alternatively when it comes to Calzaghe... where does he rank all-time?... "Wouldn't even make the top 100!!" .......americanized double standards at it's finest.. It's even worse when some people even dare to trump Roy Jones with Hopkins.. ...ho ho ho... I'm in that thread too..

 

My bad. Calzaghe was just such a shameful ducker for so many years that I forgot about that Hopkins scenario.

 

:bears: Well said Kauks. The divisions were just as God-awful as each other. At least Joe stayed unbeaten during his time there... :crafty: