✩✩✩Joe Calzaghe's world famous WBO ducktionary - a career of ducking examined✩✩✩

[MAJR]

Originally Posted by realsoulja

You know I was taking it easy on you man, giving you some hype for a showdown for a later date, I don't usually pwn minions in front of a live global audience it is not my style so I was hoping you could build up a bit of a resume before you compete with me, but now I have to proceed with this:-



You claim, Sakio Bika was better than Carl Froch, because "Bika had at least fought for a World Title" is one of the shittest arguments I have come across in my ESB career.

I did not claim Bika was better than Froch. I said Bika had accomplished more on the international stage than Froch had in 2006. When Bika was fighting Beyer for the WBC Title - and winning all four rounds on the scorecards before the fight was stopped and declared a draw - Froch was fighting Brian Magee for the British and Commonwealth title. Froch had yet to graduate to the World Stage by that point.

That was the only point I made on that issue. Your agenda blinded you. You saw me say Bika accomplished more on the international stage by that point and decided in your mind that I didn't mean what I was saying but instead meant it to mean Bika was better than Froch. That is all a result of you reading a hidden meaning in my words where there was none.

Most of what follows in your post is not worth responding to because its all based on that falsehood that you've talked yourself into thinking I believe.

Hennessy turned the offer of 100000 as he considered it to be low ball offer. Howard Eastman vs Joe Calzaghe at that time could have generated a large sum, large enough for Eastman to be offered more than 100000. Eastman however made 800000 fighting Hopkins in his own division later on in his career, and was in title contention ever since fighting William Joppy back in 01.

You say that as if it was an immediate choice between Calzaghe or Hopkins. After Eastman turned down the offer to fight Calzaghe he had four fights before he fought Hopkins. I dont deny Calzaghe's camp could have offered more and that VVarren deliberately offered a smaller amount than he could have, but it still doesn't change the fact that it was Eastman's camp who turned it down only to fight lesser opposition for two more years before meeting Hopkins.

And the fact still remains Joe Calzaghe said "I dont want tough fights", and he chose to fight Shot Roy Jones Jr instead of Kelly Pavlik, Dawson, Tarver, Johnson, BHop II, Froch. This happend between 2006-2009.

I dont deny he said that, only that it cannot apply fully to his career between 2006 and 2009 when he fought some of the best fighters in his weight class and the best fighter in the division above during that period.

And I exculded Jones from that list because it was only a big payday and mean nothing, it was a fight Calzaghe took because Jones still had drawing powers because of his name and was the most lucrative fight available and Calzaghe himself was set on retiring at the end of 2008.

He fought Evans Ashira when better opposition was available, he fought Sakio Bika when he could have fought IBF Mandatory Stieglitz.

Matter of fact, he later gave up the IBF belt instead of facing Stieglitz who was promised a fight in December 2006.

Ashira fought Calzaghe in 2005. So he wasn't relevant to the period of time I discussing. Pre-2006 Calzaghe took easy fights for easy money - I have never denied this, in fact, I openly admitted repeatedly on this website - but post-2006 he took some of the toughest fights available. Anyone who denies that clearly has their own agenda

Stieglitz allowed Calzaghe to fight Bika first because he couldn't get TV coverage in Germany for the fight for October 2006 and had an agreement in writing that the winner of Calzaghe/Bika would fight Stieglitz in December of that year. Calzaghe was all set to keep that agreement before HBO stepped in and declared that they were not prepared to show Calzaghe/Steiglitz and wanted Calzaghe to fight an American instead. Calzaghe and VVarren weighted up the potential paydays and decided HBO and Manfredo would be more lucrative so took that instead. They made no secret about this as evidenced here: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

His retirement was not imminent, he took a further 3 - 6 months to decide to retire, while refusing offers from Froch, Johnson, Pavlik, Tarver, BHop II, and a few more. Here is what Joe Calzaghe said in regards to Carl Froch:-

"It's a big difference between 47-0 and 46-1. If I did lose, I'd never forgive myself. Why would I want another fight? It'd mainly be for money – that's the wrong reason."
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Calzaghe had been contemplating retirement since before his fight with Kessler. He told the BBC in 2007 that he would have one more year in boxing then he'd walk away for good. The link here: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] and quotes from the article:

He told BBC One's Inside Sport: "I realise the end is near. I'm not going to be an Evander Holyfield and fight at 44, getting my head punched in.

"I'm giving myself a 12-month span to keep at the top and then I'll let it go. There'll be no comebacks."

"I realise I'm getting to that point in my career where you're not going to improve and you slowly decline, that's nature," he said.

This is also not entirely true, Calzaghe fought a few of the best available, but there are a dozen of fighters that were better than a Shot Roy Jones Jr. There are a dozen of fighters better than Peter Manfredo. There are a dozen of fighters better than Sakio Bika. There are a dozen of fighters better than Evans Ashira, for example Carl Froch and Glen Johnson.

I didn't say it was 100 percent true, only that you cannot accuse Calzaghe of avoiding all the tough fights when he fought Lacy as the underdog, Kessler at a time when people were debating whether it was Calzaghe or Kessler who was the best Super Middleweight and moved up a division to fight Hopkins when Hopkins was considered the Light Heavyweight King.

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by MAJR

I did not claim Bika was better than Froch.

So you admit Froch was better than Bika?

Originally Posted by MAJR

I said Bika had accomplished more on the international stage than Froch had in 2006.

And I proved to you in the last response, just because you fight for a World title it does not mean you are a worthy world title contender. Froch had proved himself to be more worthy of a shot at the title than Sakio Bika, however because Bika was seen as the cheaper/easier alternative, aswell as boxing politics Bika was given the shot before Froch had. Had Froch stepped into the ring with Markus Beyer he would have, IMO, knocked Beyer out. Lets continue.

Originally Posted by MAJR

When Bika was fighting Beyer for the WBC Title - and winning all four rounds on the scorecards before the fight was stopped and declared a draw

Bika did not win all four rounds, the scorecards at the time were 38-38, 38-38, and 40 -36 in favour of Beyer. And I will go into proving just because you fight for the world title does not make you a worthy contender, Froch was more worthy of a world title shot than Sakio Bika was at the time, but boxing politics gave Bika the shot beforehand.

Originally Posted by MAJR

- Froch was fighting Brian Magee for the British and Commonwealth title. Froch had yet to graduate to the World Stage by that point.

So you consider Dimitry Salita more accomplished at the world stage than Lucas Matthyysse?

Do you consider Chisora more accomplished at the world stage than Tyson Fury?

Do you consider Paul McClocksley more accomplished at the world stage than Kell Brook?

Does that mean they are more worthy of a title shot?

It dont mean shit, today we have a SMW champ Carl Froch just like we had a SMW champ in the past Joe Calzaghe.

And we have a domestic level prospect today George Groves, just like we had a domestic level prospect in the past Carl Froch.

And we have a fighter that has fought for a world title today Mehdi Boudla, just like we had a fighter than had fought for a world title in the past Sakio Bika.

So according to your logic, a Froch vs Boudla fight is more legitimate than Froch vs Groves, because Boudla is more proven at the world stage than Groves

Originally Posted by MAJR

That was the only point I made on that issue. Your agenda blinded you

Then simply agree on the following points:-

1. Froch was better than Bika
2. Froch was more worthy title contender than Bika

Originally Posted by MAJR

Most of what follows in your post is not worth responding to because its all based on that falsehood that you've talked yourself into thinking I believe.

Same shit different toilet. You say Bika was more worthy than Froch of the title shot because he had fought at the world stage, you just ducked it because it defeated your whole ideology.

Originally Posted by realsoulja

Sub-Pwnage

- Odalainer Solis, Chisora, and Manuel Char have fought for the WBC World HW Title, so do you consider them better than Tyson Fury, Pulev and David Price?

Here is the IBF rankings for October 2006:-

http://s8.postimage.org/sz2ahmoed/ibf06.jpg

As you can see, not only is Froch ranked higher than Bika, Bika is not even in the top 5, not even in the top 10, not even in the top 15.

Here is the WBO rankings for October 2006:-

http://s8.postimage.org/gja61mkg5/wbo06.jpg

Again Froch is ranked higher than Bika, but this time Bika makes it into the top 15.

------------------------------------
Further owning

1. Froch's best win at the time was better than Bika's best win
2. Before Bika fought for the SMW world title, he was a Middleweight and that was Bika's first SMW title fight, Carl Froch had always been a SMW.
3. Bika had lost to Sam Solimon, who did Carl Froch lose to at that time?
4. Froch's British and Commonwealth SMW titles were alot more credible than Sakio Bika's OBPF and Austrailian MW titles
5. Froch was more known to not only Britain but to the entire globe more than Sakio Bika was

I think it has been established, and it is now irrefutable, Carl Froch was a better opponent for Joe Calzaghe than Sakio Bika was

That above proves Carl Froch was a better opponent for Calzaghe than Sakio Bika was, there is no justification. You have to accept defeat here and just swallow your pride, Froch was more worthy opponent, Bika was just a cheap Austrailian Middleweight who promoters saw easy money from.

Originally Posted by MAJR

You say that as if it was an immediate choice between Calzaghe or Hopkins. After Eastman turned down the offer to fight Calzaghe he had four fights before he fought Hopkins. I dont deny Calzaghe's camp could have offered more and that VVarren deliberately offered a smaller amount than he could have, but it still doesn't change the fact that it was Eastman's camp who turned it down only to fight lesser opposition for two more years before meeting Hopkins.

Eastman was in the title contention when he already fought for the title against William Joppy and had established a decent name at the MW scene for himself. You think it was worth for him to sacrifice a whole weight division move up, be the underdog and get paid peanuts?, or do you think it was more worth for him to remain where he was and be patient until another shot at a MW title comes?

I believe Eastman camp made the correct decision, and Warrren did a sly bit of business/duckage by offering a low sum.

Originally Posted by MAJR

I dont deny he said that, only that it cannot apply fully to his career between 2006 and 2009 when he fought some of the best fighters in his weight class and the best fighter in the division above during that period.

Calzaghe's quote applies more in the latter part of his career, just look at the quote in detail:-

"I don't want tough fights, I just want big money."

Between 2006 and 2009, fights with Dawson, Pavlik, Froch, Tarver, Johnson and a few others were on the horizon, however he instead chose to fight a shot RJJ, Bika and Manfredo. Regardless, Calzaghe could have continued to fight on as he finally made it to a stage where he was accepted by both sides of the Atlantic, however when he finally reached that level he chose to become a cokehead.

Originally Posted by MAJR

I don't want tough fights, I just want big money.And I exculded Jones from that list because it was only a big payday and mean nothing, it was a fight Calzaghe took because Jones still had drawing powers because of his name and was the most lucrative fight available and Calzaghe himself was set on retiring at the end of 2008.

Its understandable, but that quote which Calzaghe said regarding Roy Jones Jr, check it out:-

"I'm not chasing after Roy Jones. Be honest, Roy Jones is a good fighter and I don't want tough fights, I just want big money."

Ironically he then chose to fight Roy Jones Jr for Big money because he was not tough anymore. So that quote did apply in 2008.

Originally Posted by MAJR

Ashira fought Calzaghe in 2005. So he wasn't relevant to the period of time I discussing. Pre-2006 Calzaghe took easy fights for easy money - I have never denied this, in fact, I openly admitted repeatedly on this website - but post-2006 he took some of the toughest fights available. Anyone who denies that clearly has their own agenda

Froch was a better opponent, or should I say a more worthy opponent than Evans Ashira was. But if you don't want to discuss pre Lacy, so be it

Originally Posted by MAJR

Stieglitz allowed Calzaghe to fight Bika first because he couldn't get TV coverage in Germany for the fight for October 2006 and had an agreement in writing that the winner of Calzaghe/Bika would fight Stieglitz in December of that year. Calzaghe was all set to keep that agreement before HBO stepped in and declared that they were not prepared to show Calzaghe/Steiglitz and wanted Calzaghe to fight an American instead. Calzaghe and VVarren weighted up the potential paydays and decided HBO and Manfredo would be more lucrative so took that instead. They made no secret about this as evidenced here: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Thanks for the details/link. HBO seemed to be a big factor in this, I still believe Froch was a more worthy contender than Bika and Manfredo, and I have given my proofs for this above and in the last response.

Originally Posted by MAJR

Calzaghe had been contemplating retirement since before his fight with Kessler. He told the BBC in 2007 that he would have one more year in boxing then he'd walk away for good. The link here: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] and quotes from the article:

He told BBC One's Inside Sport: "I realise the end is near. I'm not going to be an Evander Holyfield and fight at 44, getting my head punched in.

"I'm giving myself a 12-month span to keep at the top and then I'll let it go. There'll be no comebacks."
[i]
[size=2] "I realise I'm getting to that point in my career where you're not going to improve and you slowly decline, that's nature," he said.

Calzaghe saw what was ahead, Dawson, BHop II, Froch, Pavlik, and chose to retire.

Originally Posted by MAJR

I didn't say it was 100 percent true, only that you cannot accuse Calzaghe of avoiding all the tough fights when he fought Lacy as the underdog, Kessler at a time when people were debating whether it was Calzaghe or Kessler who was the best Super Middleweight and moved up a division to fight Hopkins when Hopkins was considered the Light Heavyweight King.

After the Hopkins fight he started avoiding all the tough fights, you agree with that at least?

[Mind Reader]

In 2008, Calzaghe saw Roy to be a relatively easy fight, against a great name and a good cashing out payday.. That much can't be debated.

[MrPR]

Originally Posted by KCD

And on the flip side Calzaghe is no Clinton Woods, Omar Sheika or Sven Ottke.

I say all 3 three of those fighters are of the same calibur that Calzaghe is , Joe is nowhere near that Special fighter that his "fans" envision to be .

[bailey]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Arcane

I've always been in this thread as evident by the multiple posts by me in here so how could I have been run off my own thread when even now i'm writing a reply to you explaining why you're an absolute fucking disgrace

You were hiding like a wet blanket at the replies earlier and only now, with a bit of support have tried stepping up.
Probably the bravest moment in your life

Since you love questions please get to articulating answers for the following;

Do you answer mine?

1. Why do people call you Failey? is it because everyone recognises you for the joke you are?

Possibly, though it often comes from butthurt fanboys.
Sad thing here is that you are asking me why im called failey, copying using the name yourself and yet dont know why it is being used .
Spot the man who cant think for himself

2. Why have user(s) who seemingly support you in public on these forums openly ridicule you in private messages they send to me

Dont know who you are on about, so cannot answer that and dont know what has been said.
Fact that you are PMing people about me, tells me you are deeply hurt

3. Why do you continue to get hammered by realsoulja? is it a Sadomasochism thing? do you enjoy getting humiliated

You now kissing arse trying to make friends . Sad way to carry on

[bailey]

[quote]

Originally Posted by realsoulja

Froch had more to offer than Ashira, Bika and Manfredo.
Not to forget, Gimenez and Jimenez, Pudwill, Sobot, Mkrtchyan, Salem, McIntyre...... and Thornberry.

Probably not when those fights happened and Froch wanted to win a world title first.
You still trying to rewrite Froch quotes?

But Calzaghe was showing no interest in fighting Froch because he didn't want any tough fights, you know Calzaghe did not want any tough fights, here is Calzaghe saying he did not want any tough fights:-

Yet beat the fighter who when past best coming off a loss beat Froch. Got it

"I don't want tough fights"

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Yet still beat all of his rival SMWs before moving up. He didnt want tough fights and didnt have them because he won most of his fights convincingly when beating the best of his division

Froch was a tough fight, Glen Johnson was a tough fight, Howard Eastman was a tough fight......

Shame Eastman didnt take the fight, shame Johnson who was a lesser SMW than many on Calzaghes resume didnt want to wait for the fight to be rescheduled.
Also if Johnson was a tough fight then further credit to Calzaghe beating the fighter who beat him

I think you haven't followed the Froch-Calzaghe saga properly even though I schooled you in its history earlier. Froch thought Calzaghe wouldnt fight him unless he had a title, read the quote properly.

Probably not. Froch didnt bring much to the table. Wasnt a mandatory, wouldnt be a tune up, didnt offer American TV

"I don't think Calzaghe will fight me unless I put a meaningful title on the line but if I get one of the major belts he could not swerve me. - Carl Froch

Which he didnt do until after Calzaghe had moved up a weight and had his last fight

And from the same article this is what Froch said:-
"I know what to do to beat Calzaghe,"

Where Froch now says he couldnt outpoint Calzaghe and would just hope to catch him.
Yeah thats the way

Here you have Froch talking about a Calzaghe fight without mentioning any world titles:-

"I'd like to fight Calzaghe, probably next year after a couple of fights for the British title,"

So even here is saying he would like to fight Calzaghe down the line but not then

And here you see Froch talking about a Calzaghe fight (post Lacy) without mentioning any world titles:-

"Joe says he's looking to make the most money possible from his next fight,........ Given the options open to him, that must mean fighting me. It certainly wouldn't mean someone like Inkin. - Carl Froch.

Calzaghe at that time was making money whoever he fought as evidenced with Manfredo.
even now froch fighting Kessler next isnt even as big as Calzaghe vs Manfredo in amount of people.
Also Inkin beat Froch as an amateur like Manfredo did

"I am a proper challenger. I am the best in the division and politics shouldn't stop us meeting. It would be an exciting battle before I smoked his boots." - Froch

Yet wasnt even a mandatory and lost to Kessler who Calzaghe beat

So your claim that Froch said he wants a title before a Calzaghe fight has been debunked.

You said that above. Read what you wrote

Yea we have already been through the Calzaghe SMW WBO reign of terror filled with subs, gimmes, bums and fights to boost sales in America.

Which still has a win over the first fighter to beat Froch

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by bailey

Probably not when those fights happened and Froch wanted to win a world title first.
You still trying to rewrite Froch quotes?

You are saying Evans Ashira was a bigger fight than Carl Froch. Froch was also a bigger fight than Sakio Bika.

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by bailey

[Yet still beat all of his rival SMWs before moving up.

Another false statement said by bailey

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by bailey

even now froch fighting Kessler next isnt even as big as Calzaghe vs Manfredo

Another bullshit statement, , all these false statements you make is why you are known as failey.

Froch vs Kessler > Calzaghe vs Manfredo

[dinovelvet]

Froch WAS Joe's mandatory, for the WBC belt. He vacated instead.

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by bailey

...before moving up. He didnt want tough fights and didnt have them because he won most of his fights convincingly when beating the best of his division

You finally accept, Calzaghe never wanted tough fights. that explains his avoiding off Johnson, Froch, Dawson, Pavlik.......

[bailey]

Originally Posted by realsoulja

Another false statement said by bailey

His main rivals before moving up were Lacy and Kessler and Calzaghe beat them both

[realsoulja]

Originally Posted by bailey

His main rivals before moving up were Lacy and Kessler and Calzaghe beat them both

So you admit he had rivals other than Lacy and Kessler, therefore you previous statement:-

Originally Posted by bailey

[Yet still beat all of his rival SMWs before moving up.

Has been proven bullshit, not only by myself, but you also accepted he did not beat "all" his rivals at SMW.

[bailey]

Originally Posted by realsoulja

Another bullshit statement, , all these false statements you make is why you are known as failey.

Froch vs Kessler > Calzaghe vs Manfredo

The fact that you are cutting down my sentences says it all .
My comment

even now froch fighting Kessler next isnt even as big as Calzaghe vs Manfredo in amount of people.

How many will be in attendance for Froch/Kessler and how many were in attendance for Calzaghe/Manfredo.

Nows thats pwnage as well as brutal self pwnage by shortening sentences because you cant answer

[bailey]

Originally Posted by realsoulja

Another bullshit statement, , all these false statements you make is why you are known as failey.

Froch vs Kessler > Calzaghe vs Manfredo

Originally Posted by realsoulja

You finally accept, Calzaghe never wanted tough fights. that explains his avoiding off Johnson, Froch, Dawson, Pavlik.......

Why do you deny Johnson twice lost eliminators to face Calzaghe and that Johnson said he was no longer interested in the fight?
Why do you deny that . This is where I lose interest because you start clutching at straws when you try and ignore certain facts