Better Top 5 Wins at SMW: Froch or Calzaghe?

someones been on an agenda overnight with the poll enough to create another 100 login IDs to support Calzaghe. wat a nutter. still losing the poll even with the cheat.

I wonder who the perpetrator was?

 

sneaky one there JB. So you seem to be of the opinion that Otkkes reign was the credible one in reality.

You failed there on so many levels.

 

seriously GZ, there are some mental zealots on the forums like this. amazing how the Zaghes count poll transformed overnight in a few hours because some lonely zealot stayed up all night saturday. Zaghes was on 16 votes a few hours ago! suddenly BOOM from some insomniac nutter fanboy.

If we could just bottle (hint) up all the alcoholic (hint) energy from that irish flavour (hint) zeal, we could run the electric grid for a week without spending a dollar.

 

The thing I realised a while back is that a lot of the guys here refuse to be objective when talking about their favourite fighters resume. I like fighter x which means he must be a hofer/atg

 

So you think the belt makes the fighter now?
So what belts did W Klitschko hold when fighting D Haye, want it the IBO & WBO?.

Thing is at SMW all the belts were of similar worth

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.

The belts are of similar age and the 2 fighters with the best SMW resumes were WBO champs

 

Why wasnt Ottkes reign credible?

 

Flawed logic.
The organisation was seen as worthless, which made all of their belts worthless.
It wasn't recognised by:
1 Boxing mags like The Ring
2: Top American fighters and Promoters
3: TV networks like HBO and Showtime

Reality Check: Roy Jones Never Ducked Joe Calzaghe

http://www.***********.com/reality-check-roy-jones-never-ducked-joe-calzaghe--15286

 

No, Ottke had acheived a little more than Calzaghe when Ottke retired.

No, you failed there on so many levels with your massive brain-fart.

 

That doesnt say anything about Jones not ducking or ducking Calzaghe.
So because a magazine that calls itself the bible of boxing says something, you take it all in? The Ring is a magazine that invented a belt, and calls itself worthy and people just take it all in.
You best turn the sound down when you watch a boxing match so you are not swayed by the commentary.
What that thread has done is proved my point about fighters making the belt, not the belt making the fighter.
So if the WBO was lacking, explain the WBA & WBC here

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.

The belts are of similar age and the 2 fighters with the best SMW resumes were WBO champs.

Do you now not rate Eubank who has a superior resume to most SMWs. Eubank was a big name in the SMW division with his WBO belt before Calzaghe came along.

 

Calzaghe's is still slightly deeper at this point. The win over Kessler slightly tops it. Notice the word "slightly"
If Froch manages to avenge his loss and picks up another good win or two. Then il give it to Froch

 

How do you work that out when Calzaghe has Eubank, Mitchell, Reid, Lacy, Woodhall on his resume who all have better SMW resumes than Bute. Plus Calzaghe has the wins over Veit and Brewer who were SMW champs as were the others I listed for Calzaghe, not to forget all of the top 10 names Calzaghe beat.

Be honest, do you know the history of the division?

Dirrell hasnt done anything at SMW. Neither has Pascal, Johnson or Abraham

 

??????
Those organisations had been around for more than 30 years at that point and were recognised by the following organisations which refused to recognise the wbo.

Terrible logic and flawed on so many levels.

Eubank was never considered a legit champion. The reason he had the wbo belts was because he could call himself a world champion and not have to fight any of the top world class fighters. Which is why he made a point of missing ALL of them at mw and smw.

 

the history of the SMW division that you are harking on about was virtually non existent in the time period you are raising as yielding good resumes. absolute bums were making the top ten and poor contenders were winning smw titles back then, esp for wbo. Figure in your names you keep robotically listing but never considering - Veit, Woodhall etc who would be struggle inthe deeper SMW division today and would get torn apart in the MW division of their time.

the history of the MW division by comparison during the same period has massive depth, history and respect, drawing the best fighters into it throught those years. .

its funny how you continually chide others for telling you the truth - that the smw division was pants compared to the superior MW .NO not funny, the word is arrogant, very arrogant indeed for avoiding the truth all these years

i guess that wont stop you from continuing though.