Joe Calzaghe the greatest super middleweight ever...

Very and people want to say he brought credibility to the WBO

 

With due respect McClellan only had one fight at SMW and lost to a fighter who lost to a fighter Calzaghe beat. I know it doesnt work as the he beat him so he will beat him, but Gerald only had 1 fight in the division which he lost.
Jones beat an overated Toney, but the rest is negligable

Doesnt matter SImperial. We are talking about the WBO SMW title.
An old post where details have altered slightly, but as you can see at SMW, no title is any more recognised than any other

I just wanted to highlight some details to you.
The SMW divisions first world champs were WBC 1988, WBA 1987, IBF 1984 & WBO 1988.
Now for a start it is a new division so no belt has any more prestige than the other as they were all started at a similar time. So the WBO SMW title has no less prestige than the others.
Consider also that the WBO at SMW has been involved in 4 unification bouts.
The IBF has been involved in 2
The WBA in 3
WBC in 4 also
This shows that the WBO has been as willing to make top fights at SMW as much as any other governing body.

Now look at the list of champs in each and who they defended against and you can see that the WBO SMW title has produced the best defences overall better than all of the other govening bodies in this particular weight division so far.
Consider how much critism Bute gets now for his IBF defences.
Consider M Beyer defending his WBC title against 26-14-5 fighter who was coming off of a win against a 0-2-0 fighter
Or that Mundine when defending the WBA title against a 24-13-5 fighter who was the same fighter that WBC champ Beyer was defending against above.

People bring up Eubank who helped mould the belt that was good enough to give T Hearns a slice of history making. Out of Eubanks 18 WBO SMW title fights 14 of those fights were against fighters who were, had been or became top 10 SMWs. One was a unification and another was against the undefeated former IBF SMW champ (relinquished his title). In fact 6 of the fighters he faced had been or became world champs

Who didnt Calzaghe prove it to and how was he protected. He has the best SMW resume atsch

Even if it was, that means nothing at all. The Ring is an opinion for an American audience.
I have shown many top 10 rated opponents Calzaghe has beaten.

Look at M Veit for example. He won the WBO INT title, beat some world rated SMWs has a better record than 6 of the current Ring top 10 fighters and only ever lost to world champ or fighters who became as well as beating a fighter who became world champ. If you look at BoxRec points Veit would be in the top 10 today, yet because America doesnt know him they ignorantly discard him. He has a far better resume than Dirrell for example.

So if you work out how many fighters were top 10 rated and how many became top 10 rated after Calzaghe beat them he fought 22 SMW title fights and 15 were or became top 10 rated. I havent included Ferreyra who had been top 10 rated before fighting Calzaghe

This content is protected

, Thats very good but even better when you note Calzaghes LHW career, because as a career total it becomes

This content is protected

But you are still wrong because he fought

This content is protected

fighters who were rated when he fought them. Reid, Sheika, Woodhall, Veit2, Brewer, Mitchell, Ashira, Manfredo, Lacy, Kessler, Jones, Hopkins, Bika. Eubank got rated for his loss so could be included to make

This content is protected

 

Who cares if Calzaghe was on American TV or not? I doubt C John is on yet he beat Marquez, Gainer etc.
The reason America didnt focus on the SMW division is because the top American SMWs were not able to compete in the European class. Now that Ward looks a good bet, the interest is there. Same as when Jones was in the division, Mitchell and Lacy.
Calzaghes SMW resume is very strong and he fought in a far tougher era.
Just look at The Rings top 10 now

Champ. Ward
1 Bute
2 Kessler
3 Froch
4 Steiglitz
5 Bika
6 Oousthuizen
7 Groves
8 Johnson
9 Abraham
10 DeGale

Calzaghe beat years ago the #2 and #5, Johnson was never able to compete at SMW in Calzaghes era and was beaten by a fighter Calzaghe beat. Groves, DeGale and Oousthuizen would never have made it in the top 10 with what they have done so far back then and neither would Johnson who couldnt compete at SMW then

 

People shouldnt bother replying, from what I have seen Bailey cant be beat.

 

It does look that way.
I haven't seen anyone out debate him on a Calzaghe thread in as long as I can remember.

 

I just give facts

 

Lol. This is something.

 

and you think Calz was???

come on.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

fact :deal

 

Sorry Bails, Boxing Monthly and certainly wbo rankings are no substitute for The Ring rankings. I think everyone knows this.

How many guys were Ring ranked top 10 at the time Calzaghe fought them?
Not years later, or before.

Veit would be unnoticed now for the same reason he and Calzaghe were largely unnoticed then.... Fighting strictly wbo ranked guys is no substitute for fighting world ranked guys. Back then the wbo was not on equal footing with the other orgs, like it more or less is now.

 

Please explain why their competition was "disgraceful", taking into account how long each was active in the division, and defences mandated by the governing bodies.

 

The butthurt when JC edged it against Hopkins is absolutely epic. Considering how messy the fight was, and how old Hopkins where it really should not be a big deal. Yet American fans try to pull every possible rabbit out of the hat.

 

Dumb post. Really dumb.

Beating mandatories over long time is not easy, which is why there are so few dominating champs around. And this poster calls it "maybe alright", as if winning over little known pro boxers is a disgrace in itself, and defeating world recognized champs like Kessler and Lacy is barely acceptable.

 

If Calzaghe had beaten Eubank , Jones and Hopkins in there prime there would be no doubt but he didnt so the answer is clearly no