Joe Calzaghe is the least proven, most managed undefeated fighter that ever lived

Look, I don't care how old B-Hop was when Calzaghe fought him... B-Hop is an ATG and proved that with his wins after he turned 40. If Calzaghe was "The least proven, most managed undefeated fighter who ever lived," B-Hop would definitely not be on his resume... win or loss, 29 or 40... he wouldn't be there. :deal

 

yes, true, it sayd a lot about the diluted SMW that fighters who couldnt get a shot at MW automatically got title shots at SMW when they moved up. .

They were all pioneers of SMW, and had an easy route in many ways.Along with Eubank a few years previous

tbh I rate Eubanks defences ahead of JCs, up until Joe part-unified in his last fight, then he moved ahead of Chris. but they both get the HOF status for holding record defences at the time.

 

yes, you and Trevor Berbick.Trevor, trevor...


but sure the OP is a Joe-hater, I acknowledge that fact.

 

I don't buy the argument that a lot of defenses = HOF. I had a buddy in college who picked up a lot of large, unattractive girls. It didn't make him a player.

 

LOL you didnt know me at college? yeah but its still a record for now, Jeff. That has to be recognised.

A record is a record, until its broken. Roger Bannister was seen as the fastest mile runner until everyone else started running sub-4 minute miles, and he will always be famous for holdnig that record, even if it was just for a day or two.

Pretty sure its only about a dozen real defences, but 21 is the the figure in the book. Doubtless it will be broken at some point. If only there was a SMW division in fight Night, I;d have a crack tonight.

 

Roger Bannister accomplished something great, something no other human being in history had done. Many boxers, even Sven Ottke, managed to retire undefeated.

Joe Cal sitting on his belt at home is not, in and of itself, a great thing. I am 100% confident that dozens of boxers throughout history could have gone through an equally weak resume undefeated, therefore it is not a record of accomplishment rather one of accumulation.

 

well, sure but JoeCalzaghe, to date, has done what no one else has done, however thin his resume is.

Its still a record.

I agree its more accumulation than accomplishment, but most records garnered over years require a good degree of accumulation anyway.

 

Let's just hope future boxers don't decide to take a similar road in order to beat that record.

 

that will only make it last longer lol.


get some bald german guy on the blower, he'll sort it out.

 

tko 6?

 

I totally agree with your comment, and I am a hardcore Bernard Hopkins fan. Although I had Hopkins winning the fight on my scorecard, I accept the fact that he lost to Calzaghe, and will refuse to make excuses otherwise.

Calzaghe deserves credit for his victory, and how he closed out his career. Say what you want about the quality opposition he faced before Kessler, but you cannot deny the fact that he validated his undefeated record in his last 3 fights. Joe closed out his career by beating Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, and Roy Jones Jr. If beating this trio in back-to-back-to-back fights in one year does not prove anything, I don't know what does!

 

Without reading every post, I'll just say that Calzaghe was clearly better than Ottke in every measurable way.

Also, you could argue that his competition level compares favourably to Lopez. Finito is one of my all-time favourites, so I won't go on about how great he was - it was through little fault of his own though, that he didn't have a who's-who of stellar opponents to go through. I'd have loved to see him face (and beat) Carbajal and Chiquita - that would have added a nice layer to his resume. It's already very good but if I'm being honest, it doesn't tower over Joe's.

Calzaghe was much better than his haters will ever admit and not quite as good as his most rabid fans would like to pretend. A really ****ing good fighter who'll make the HOF. That's more than enough for me.

 

Also, if you take a closer look (without any biases), you will see that Joe Calzaghe's resume looks far less pathetic than Floyd Mayweather's.

Floyd is so overrated, it is not even funny. Why does Calzaghe get heat for retiring at age 37 (after beating Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, and Roy Jones Jr.), yet Floyd gets a free pass for retiring at age 30 (although he has since come back, only to continue his pattern of ducking the best fighters)?

While I am at it, someone please give me Floyd's best 3 wins. (I'm sure they do not come close to the caliber of Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, and Roy Jones Jr.)

 

So much fail in one post. Mayweather's wins at 130/135 eclipse Joe's 1 win against a quality opponent (Kessler) and two cash out fights against old men.

 

well at least he fought BHop when it still matters.