I wouldnt call either the GOAT at LHW but they were the best 2 LHWs at the time and Calzaghe the best LHW for the short time he was there. After Calzaghe beat Hopkins, Hopkins became champ again, which is a fair amount of time. I expect when Hopkins career is looked back on, alot of what he did at LHW will be talked about. I felt Calzaghe beat Hopkins sandwiched between his best wins of Tarver, Wright and Pavlik with Pascal to come some years later. I wouldnt call Hopkins the GOAT at LHW but he has a fair resume with Tarver LHW champ, Wright, Pavlik, Jones, Pascal LHW champ. I dont think there are too many LHWs with a run like that in such a short space of fights to be fair
seeing as Calzaghe is generally perceived as the Welsh dragon, and the English and Welsh have a traditional uncomfortable rivalry, then its no suprise a lot of UK fans arent big on Cal even without considering the other points that lower his appeal for them. Hes MASSIVE in Wales though, I'll give you that.
He might have been the most accomplished after a narrow win over Hopkins. But the best? We have Dawson, who would have been a serious threat. Kessler was able to tag Joe quite a lot, I wonder if Joe could have taken Dawsons better power.
Not a single one of the Hopkins opponents you mentioned was a great lightheavy.Wright was a natural 154 pounder that lost a wrestling match with B-Hop at lightheavy,a weight Ronald had never fought at before.Pavlik was fighting at lightheavyweight for the 1st time and has lost to Sergio Martinez at 160 since then.Who have Jean Pascal and Tarver beaten?Your "fair resume" quote was quite accurate.My question for you wasn't whether or not Hopkins was the GOAT at 175.I think it would be absolutely crazy to consider Hopkins anywhere near that.I don't believe the resume of Pavlik,Wright,Tarver,Pascal and shot Jones could even begin to warrant that conversation.I believe Hopkins' resume at 175 just indicates how thin the division was when he was there.My question was if you considered Hopkins an ATG at 175.I don't believe he belongs in the conversation there,either.But if you do,cheers.My other question was whether or not you believe Joe Calzaghe is the GOAT at 175.I don't believe he belongs in that conversation either.But if you do,cheers.But neither of their resumes nor their performances there indicates that they belong in those conversations.Cheers.
but this is about accomplishment if anything, not being the best, most people agree that JC is the most accomplished in this adolescent, growing stage of the SMW division, but hardly anyone thinks of Joe Calzaghe as the best, unless they happen to be Welsh. no way in hell was Calzaghe the best LH at any time - thats why he picked old men to defend against and then ran away back to Wales as soon as Chad challenged him. AT LH Dawson would KO that Cal, so I think he did the right thing in running. It was actually a very Calzaghist thing to do, story of his career.
A lot of American boxing fans like myself don't care where a boxer is from, especially if they are from Europe. Hell my blood lines are probably closer to calzaghe's compared to most of my neighbors.
Cheers:good.But why take another poster to task by invoking his and Calzaghe's nationality and not supporting Calzaghe whereas they're both British?
I am a fan of Joe. I thought he was underrated and proved how great he was. Very solid fighter. And he fought good fighters and was undefeated.
No, but I like to see the man tested against top opposition and he stepped out of the game when he felt he was at the top. So leave it, he beat Kessler, he beat my man Hopkins fair and square, he beat a game RJJ, I believe he would beat Froch and a whole lot of other guys such as possibly Ward and Bute. I am not a fan but I like a good fighter when I see one.