Originally Posted by Arcane
Ok boss have a look at this article
Now in the article team Ottke accuse no show Joe and his camp of ducking them, what we've always heard from Joe's promoter is that it was Ottke who wanted no part of Calzaghe but this account differs and says it was indeed Joe and his camp who were terrified of Ottke hence prefered the mando bums instead of the big unification fight the division needed. Now if it is true (which it looks it is) that Calzaghe did indeed duck Ottke then we can say it's consistent with what his former promoter had to say about him.
And, to counter, the Calzaghe camp accuse Ottke of ducking him and even refusing a big-money fight in a neutral venue.
Now, do we know for certain what terms were offered and who turned what down or are we just relying on the words of the individual camps? Because if we're relying on the words of the untrustworthy scumbag W arren or Ottke's camp - who, considering the history of robberies involving Ottke, only a fool would trust - we're not going to get the full picture of anything.
Sauerland, W arren, Ottke and Calzaghe have all proven themselves dishonest and, in some cases, habitual liars, so presenting anything any of them said as if it were the gospel truth is a ludicrous position to take.
But if you want to blindly trust the word of proven habitual liars just to promote your own biased agenda then that's your problem.