Froch says he has a better legacy then cazaghe

lol hes just trying to sell the fight. Froch is actually fun to listen to, his radio interv

 

why is it easier to fight someone when you are fortysomething, than when you are prime?
human biology (ie FACT) dictates its harder as an old man than as a prime fighter.

interesting view, seeing that Hopkins did fight prime ATGs and HOFers.

For the record theres no need for me to accuse Calzaghe of not going abroad. Just check his passport stamps, theres a factual record of him not going abroad.

 

so you think calzaghe shoud have 'built up a better legacy by taking more risks and losing a few fights'.

who against and what year?

 

a Reid rematch and prime Beyer spring to mind.

He didnt NEED fight them, but you are asking for opponents who are a better match for him. Opponents like this would build his legacy. Being unified champ and defending would make foran awesome Roy Jones type of legacy.

Sure Beyer migt have beat him once, chasing Roy and showing Bhop themoney in 2002 would surely result in a whipping of his ass perhaps onnce or twice, but Joe would be better respected worldwide if he did, because threads like this wouldnt exist, for one thing.

 

when have i said its easier to fight someone at 43 than at 37?

hopkins was the one who turned down a career high payday in to fight a 30 year old calzaghe, and then 6 years later agreed to fight a 36 year old calzaghe.

calzaghe fought many times abroad in england against english fighters but thats not something a continually ignorant person would understand anyway.

so as champion, who do you think it is that joe should have travelled abroad to fight and in what year? we've already established that calzaghe was prepared to fight hopkins in america in 2002.

 

so you think calzaghe beating reid for a 2nd time and beating beyer would bring about a greater respect for joe in america

 

Hopkins never ducked anyone.

Hopkins had a choice, either move up to SMW and fight different challenges, or continue to remain at MW at get a BIG pay day vs Oscar De la Hoya.

Hopkins made his money, and eventually fought Calzaghe when Hopkins was physically past his prime and Calzaghe was coming off his greatest win.

But the fact is, Hopkins didnt take the fight in 2002/03.

 

so you now agree that Hopkins didnt pick an easy route, he picked a harder route. fine.

err, Cal is English lol. Where are you from again?

you've asked me already, I replied above. Broken record isnt my style.

 

HArd to argue this.

 

well you do need to read the whole post if you are going to do the honour of replying, theres a good man.


For example, it would be bad taste for me to say Hopkins was afraid of Calzaghe and so not accepting a fight in 2002, and ignore the fact that he sought a match and rematch with him later once the money was bigger.

EDIT - you know I think you might have me confused with someone else here. I am not underselling Cal for what he was for 99% of his championship year, and that was a minor title holder, so hjis legacy isnt bad with that in mind. I am not underselling him like some do, but I am also not trying to oversell him and make out he was undisputed when he only unified in his last ever SMW fight.

I am a fan of his, I guess you might say a Brittard.

But he could have done better, thats a universal view these days.

 

Every one knows who CalSlappy is

 

He's Welsh.

 

That's some way of putting it, ignoring that Hopkins was coming off of dominating wins against Tarver and Winky Wright, and after the Calzaghe fight went on to beat an undefeated Kelly Pavlik, and regain the title from Jean Pascal.

Calzaghe was past his physical prime, and was towards the very end of his career, he only had one more fight after Hopkins.

 

english born. his english fanbase is huge.


Moving to Wales was a good move, gave him good strength at the knee when growing up with all those hills. In London he would have been a lesser champ.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12423293&postcount=97

atsch

So why did Hatton lose, was it because of Mayweather being one of the greatest counter punchers in WW history and just had that stylistic advantage over Hatton who is a pressure fighter?

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12423293&postcount=97

:rofl

So you are trying to refute the concept of 'Styles make fights'?

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12423915&postcount=102

:roflatsch

I already said this way back earlier on page 2, :-

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12420799&postcount=30

:deal
---------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12426394&postcount=111

Explain the correlation between your Mayweather - Hatton point, with:-

You claimed this:-

Ward UD12 Froch, so because Calzaghe is better than Ward, that is why, Calzaghe would destroy Froch.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12420713&postcount=27

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12420998&postcount=35

What has Mayweather beating Hatton got to do with this.
----------------------------------------------------------
You ****ed up son