Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-15-2008, 02:48 PM   #46
Dave's Top Ten
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet Pea
Calzaghe would've beaten Toney. I'd have been willing to bet a fair deal of money on it.
I think the styles make it close. I see Toney fighting off the ropes a lot and countering Calzaghe to a points win.
Dave's Top Ten is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 11-15-2008, 02:51 PM   #47
Executioner
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,800
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

I can see this going either way
Executioner is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 02:55 PM   #48
Dave's Top Ten
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave's Top Ten
I think the styles make it close. I see Toney fighting off the ropes a lot and countering Calzaghe to a points win.
and scoring a KD along the way. JC's come forward style winging punches make him vulnerable. One of his biggest weaknesses ( and overlooked on this debate) is his constant risk taking. It would land him in hot water against Hagler, Jones, Toney, Hopkins at their peaks (it almost did against ancient Hopkins / Jones) who were smarter fighters in that regard.
Dave's Top Ten is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 02:55 PM   #49
The Whaler
My dog be thorough.
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: n. A place where something is or could be located; a site.
Posts: 635
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Hagler outworks and outhustles Calzaghe... then Hagler loses by Split-Decision.
The Whaler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 03:02 PM   #50
Verbalkint
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 142
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave's Top Ten
JT, to be honest those views seem several times more extreme than the ones I laid out. Not really polar. Let's get a little more realistic. JC has proven himself an excellent fighter over the years, but his 'greatness' comes from fighting unproven fighters or 'shells'. I was at the fight at MSG and was shocked how little RJJ had left. He was done. He still managed to have JC almost out in the first round. At supermiddle, I think prime Toney and Jones handle JC without too many problems. Prime Hopkins comes up from middleweight and handles him fairly easily. Prime Eubank perhaps nicks it. Micheal Watson would have given him fits in a similar way Reid did. Calzaghe STRUGGLED with 168. 164? He would be drained! After a fiddly few opening rounds the fight becomes one sided against Hagler, who I think ends up pummeling Calzaghe. Bottom line, I think a few of us are getting carried away with JC. At 168? Granted, that would be more entertaining.

Oh my goodness I can see Calzaghe's head snapping back now as he on rushes onto Hagler's right jab. Down goes Joe ...again

Couldnt have put it better myself.
Verbalkint is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 03:04 PM   #51
Robbi
Marvelous
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 7,550
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Whaler
Hagler outworks and outhustles Calzaghe... then Hagler loses by Split-Decision.
So Hagler's wins, but actually loses?. Is this in reference to the Leonard decision by any chance? He certainly never outworked Leonard or outhustled him. Pretty much vice versa IMO.
Robbi is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 03:20 PM   #52
birddog
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 506
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

A short opinion on my part, without getting into the weeds. First big Hagler fan here, but i'm not of the mindset the Marv is the end all.

I think Joe wins this under current rules (prior day weigh in). As Marv would be up against a true LHW. Who has excellent hand and foot speed (like a WW), ring intelligence, and a maybe higher workrate than hagler himself had. It's the old good big man beats good smaller man here.

As much as I like Marv, I think Joe would be too much.

If at 164 catch weight, same day weigh in then Hagler
birddog is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:25 PM   #53
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manassa
****ing hell

The objective oracle speaks
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:29 PM   #54
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave's Top Ten
Apologies if someone has already mentioned it, but the weight limit in this fantasy matchup is CLEARLY to the detriment of Calzaghe and should be considered when theorizing on the outcome.
I still don't see 4 pounds at a weight up that high meaning we have some sort of emaciated dying Calz being helped into the ring.

The more pertinent point IMO is that Hagler would come in weighing say 160 fight time while Calz by then will be 180+.

Now we are talking some serious weight.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:58 PM   #55
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave's Top Ten
JT, to be honest those views seem several times more extreme than the ones I laid out. Not really polar. Let's get a little more realistic.
I'm sure you see my point tho, and that is it's a two horse race not a totally one sided negative critique.

Quote:
JC has proven himself an excellent fighter over the years, but his 'greatness' comes from fighting unproven fighters or 'shells'.
Personally i see him substancially better than that, but each to their own. If he was a natural 160 i can see him going extremely well vs Marvin's opposition, including a win over SRL at the same career stage via pure workrate and imposing himself. He's well past it now but still fighting effectively.

Quote:
I was at the fight at MSG and was shocked how little RJJ had left. He was done.
I still can't work out why anyone thought Jones wasn't done. He was shot many years ago and hadn't beat anyone to say other.

Quote:
He still managed to have JC almost out in the first round.
I wouldn't call it almost out myself. Let us not smoke over the fact Joe is well past his peak here. If Hagler fought on he too would have run into probs - big ones. The thing is Joe is still winning over some of the best in boxing, and that is a very notable accomplishment.

Quote:
Prime Hopkins comes up from middleweight and handles him fairly easily.
I'd never ever say "easily", and i think it's safe to say prime Hopkins is always going to fight at the higher weights more comfortably than a Hagler. He's shown they hold no demons for him. I think prime Hopkins would be able to win a pretty tight decision, but i'd sure hate to count Joe out.

Quote:
Prime Eubank perhaps nicks it. Micheal Watson would have given him fits in a similar way Reid did.
Older Eubank was beaten handily by a green Calzaghe, i'd hate to be staking much money on him at any point. He was still developing around the Reid fight too if we are fair. He was Joe's 25th fight. Hagler by comparison was losing to both the Boogaloo and Monroe at this stage. Colbert also presented great probs. I'd rather struggle and win, than struggle and lose.


You keep saying he struggled with 168, yet here we have him at 46-0 with 32 ko's. You think the extra 4 pounds will work miracles against him, but i am not so sure. Regardless he still piles on plenty of poundage pre fight to be the MUCH bigger fighter.

Quote:
After a fiddly few opening rounds the fight becomes one sided against Hagler, who I think ends up pummeling Calzaghe.
Pummeling? Regardless of who wins the fight i cannot see a pummeling either way. Anyone thinking this isn't reasonably competitive one way or another is kidding IMO.

Quote:
Bottom line, I think a few of us are getting carried away with JC. At 168? Granted, that would be more entertaining.
There's always the extremes. Some will underrate, some will overrate etc, same with Hagler. What Calz does have is one damn awkward style and skillset and i see him being a pain in the bum for most anyone. Not many are going to look good against him.

Quote:
At 168? Granted, that would be more entertaining.
Depends on how much one perceives 4 pounds. I make a lot less of it than you.

Quote:
Oh my goodness I can see Calzaghe's head snapping back now as he on rushes onto Hagler's right jab. Down goes Joe ...again
Then you woke up

Look at Hagler Larry, he can't seem to time Joe's rushes, these flurries are points in the bank. Marvin can't find the range he wants to fight at and seems lost for idea's. Calz in again, he seems to move Hagler with ease. He's definitely the stronger man in there, he's the boss.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 09:00 PM   #56
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbi
And I'm not a Calzaghe fan by the way. I'm more of a Hagler fan, easily. However, I'm not biased. I'm not the type who needs to somehow find a way to make a case for my favourite in a mythical match-up. I just call it as I see it when giving an opinion on the outcome.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 09:30 PM   #57
Robbi
Marvelous
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 7,550
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnThomas1
I wouldn't call it almost out myself. Let us not smoke over the fact Joe is well past his peak here.
JT. I'm amazed how easily you judge a fighter to be in your words "well past his peak". If thats your opinion, then Calzaghe's peak must have went down at an alarmingly rapid rate. Because against Kessler he showed he was as good as ever. The early Calzaghe would not have managed that type of performance, mainly because he was prone to being more of a puncher outwith the last 4 years.

The only problem Calzaghe has had over the last few years is his hands. He's had to pull out of some fights due to injuries and hand problems. People seriously underrate Calzaghe's power based on the Hopkins showing when he was acussed of slapping and going the distance a lot recently. But when it comes to speed, variety, boxing ability, and all round effectiveness, he came into his own around the Lacy fight.

The Calzaghe of the Lacy and Kessler fights was a far more well rounded and mature fighter than any version prior. He was clearly at his peak for those fights. Yet he's "well past his peak" only a year later? What serious signs of decline to be 'well past his peak' did you see against Jones compared to Lacy and Kessler?
Robbi is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 10:06 PM   #58
Dave's Top Ten
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnThomas1
I'm sure you see my point tho, and that is it's a two horse race not a totally one sided negative critique.



Personally i see him substancially better than that, but each to their own. If he was a natural 160 i can see him going extremely well vs Marvin's opposition, including a win over SRL at the same career stage via pure workrate and imposing himself. He's well past it now but still fighting effectively.



I still can't work out why anyone thought Jones wasn't done. He was shot many years ago and hadn't beat anyone to say other.



I wouldn't call it almost out myself. Let us not smoke over the fact Joe is well past his peak here. If Hagler fought on he too would have run into probs - big ones. The thing is Joe is still winning over some of the best in boxing, and that is a very notable accomplishment.



I'd never ever say "easily", and i think it's safe to say prime Hopkins is always going to fight at the higher weights more comfortably than a Hagler. He's shown they hold no demons for him. I think prime Hopkins would be able to win a pretty tight decision, but i'd sure hate to count Joe out.



Older Eubank was beaten handily by a green Calzaghe, i'd hate to be staking much money on him at any point. He was still developing around the Reid fight too if we are fair. He was Joe's 25th fight. Hagler by comparison was losing to both the Boogaloo and Monroe at this stage. Colbert also presented great probs. I'd rather struggle and win, than struggle and lose.


You keep saying he struggled with 168, yet here we have him at 46-0 with 32 ko's. You think the extra 4 pounds will work miracles against him, but i am not so sure. Regardless he still piles on plenty of poundage pre fight to be the MUCH bigger fighter.



Pummeling? Regardless of who wins the fight i cannot see a pummeling either way. Anyone thinking this isn't reasonably competitive one way or another is kidding IMO.



There's always the extremes. Some will underrate, some will overrate etc, same with Hagler. What Calz does have is one damn awkward style and skillset and i see him being a pain in the bum for most anyone. Not many are going to look good against him.



Depends on how much one perceives 4 pounds. I make a lot less of it than you.



Then you woke up

Look at Hagler Larry, he can't seem to time Joe's rushes, these flurries are points in the bank. Marvin can't find the range he wants to fight at and seems lost for idea's. Calz in again, he seems to move Hagler with ease. He's definitely the stronger man in there, he's the boss.
All good points JT. Suffice to say I disagree with most of 'em. For the record I was hoarse on Sunday morning after spending my Saturday night at the Garden roaring on JC. As a Brit I am proud of his accomplishments; as a realist I believe his recent wins have given him a reputation his abilities don't match. Damn good fighter but not in the same league as Hopkins, JOnes, Hagler, Toney. I believe they all beat him at 168, let alone 164.
Dave's Top Ten is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 10:11 PM   #59
Dave's Top Ten
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 579
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Oh and JT if 4 pounds is nothing then it really should have no material effect on Hagler then? Perhaps he's even better at the weight? I mean why not? He knocked out Sugar Ray Seales in one round weighing almost 162.
Dave's Top Ten is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 10:35 PM   #60
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marvin Hagler vs. Joe Calzaghe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave's Top Ten
Oh and JT if 4 pounds is nothing then it really should have no material effect on Hagler then? Perhaps he's even better at the weight? I mean why not? He knocked out Sugar Ray Seales in one round weighing almost 162.
Marvin was perfectly suited at 160, a completely natural middleweight. Even with the modern weigh in i can't see Hagler doing anything different as he is so well suited at 158 - 160. Calz by contrast leans right down then gains as much as 20 odd pounds by fight time. He's coming in at 168 but weighing 185 or even more punch time. He's a much much bigger man naturally.

Ezzard often brings the modern weigh in point up, and it's a fair comment. Fighters such as Hagler would be disadvantaged by the modern rule, where as Calz and co would be disadvantaged by the old. Who is to say Hagler under modern draining and the like would not be boiling down to 154 then fattening back up to 160 or whatever fight time. By contrast Calz might have to simply fight at 175, he certainly would in Haglers day with no 168. Even staying at 168 might be a drama.

Personally i am not sure i like the modern trend tho there hasn't been any tragedy recently.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013