Do Lewis' win over Tyson and Calzaghe's over RJJ hold any credibility?

Tyson was #1 ranked Heavyweight and Jones was #6 ranked Light Heavyweight. Neither win was a great one, and neither Tyson or Jones were as good as they had been in their prime years, but both wins have some credibility.

 

You know how much I respect you as a poster, and I always enjoy reading your posts, even if I don't agree with what you've written.

But I don't see how Lewis deserves credit, when Mike was fighting purely for money, and would go on to lose to the likes of Danny Williams and Kevin McBride shortly afterwards.

With regards to Joe, how does he deserve an ounce of credit, after laughing that Roy was past his best in a live interview, and also stating that he'd be disappointed if Roy was to be his last fight?

 

Lewis vs Tyson does hold some credibility. Calzaghe vs RJJ holds zero credibility.

 

:deal
Joe knows that win is irrelevant but cant blame him for taking that money.

 

321


here comes baileys super hans to defend joes own quotes to validate the win

 

Shortly afterward? Two years and three years later, you mean?

Have you never seen what happens to some fighters after they're totally ruined by an all-round better fighter? Ever watched the career trajectory of guys beaten by B-Hop? Is that because they've physically declined or is it because they were beaten mentally and physically by a better boxer and they've failed to recover?

Mike Tyson was ranked only behind Wlad and Lewis in the rankings when the fight was made.

 

I don't blame him.

But it's his whole attitude.

He'd have gotten a lot more respect had he been honest.

But he can't because his ego is so huge.

I used to think that Roy had the biggest ego, until I'd heard Joe in interviews.


He didn't want Roy or put any value on the fight.

Yet he signed for it, and pretended that Roy was back to his best, after three great wins.


Even last year he was trying to kid to himself and his fans.

Admitting that although Roy was past his best, he was still dangerous, and nobody had ever outboxed him like he had.

He obviously missed the third Tarver fight, and the Glen Johnson fight.


We're talking about a guy here, who knew what his capabilities were in 2003, and who wanted huge money because of the risk factor.

Then that same guy, despite everything he'd said, then personally phoned Roy up to make the fight, even accepting Roy's 50/50 terms.


Yet his fans will justify it all.

He didn't want to fight Tarver, and his fans respect his reason as to why not.

Yet those same people want to give him credit for his win over Roy.


They're completely deluded.


Where are the Danny Green and Glen Johnson threads, discussing their relevant wins over Roy?

They don't exist.


Joe defended his WBO belt over and over in Europe, in a different weight division, but was then happy to fly to America and fight at LHW in 2008.


I wonder why that was?

 

I don't care where Mike was ranked.

He was a complete mess.

He wasn't focused, and was fighting to pay towards his out of control life.

That obviously wasn't Lewis's fault, and you might not have had a shred of sympathy for Mike.

But he was a shell of his former self.

Poor conditioning, poor timing, hardly any head movement and combinations, just looking to land something big.

I wouldn't say there was any notable differences between the versions of Mike that fought Lewis and Williams.

 

Those wins should be in between Camacho over Leonard and Khan over Barrera. Somewhere there.

 

Of course they were credible as many predicted wins for Tyson and Jones. Cant recall with Tyson, but Jones was world rated, and it appears that only a hater would say they are not credible.

Answer this, but I bet many wont.

If Lewis came out of retirement now and Wilder beat him, dont try and say it wouldnt be Wilders best win and suddenly be credible, even though unlike Tyson, Lewis would be far older and far less active.

Now consider Calzaghe came out of retirement in his 40s and Ward beat him, imagine the hype and once again theres no doubt it would be Wards best win, which is possibly why they were even mentioning an old retired fighter, even though Calzaghe would be far older, far more weight weakened and with badly damaged hands, and far less active, yet Calzaghe had only recently gone up in weight, fought a bigger fighter, with far more experience at the weight and world rated.

Of course its credible

 

only an idiot compares ward and wilder, and such posts will be ignored by all.

in-credible.

 

How can it be credible, when Joe had LAUGHED that Roy was past his best, and said that he'd be DISAPPOINTED to take the fight?

The guy you're defending knows himself that it wasn't a credible win.

How much credit does Danny Green and Glen Johnson get?

You can't argue against what Joe himself has said.

 

they are what they are, jones wasnt shot hed still beat a lot of guys, obviosuly he wasnt his best but a lot of people picked him over joe so it was a decent win, its a different fight a few years earlier of course, tyson wasnt at his best either but again a decent fighter. Calzaghe wasnt at his best either so thats another factor,

 

I think the reason that a few people picked jones over joe was that Joe had done virtually nothing except beat Kessler and lacy all his career, whilst jones had done a zillion times that. Given that, some laymen will pick jones because it would seem stupid to pick a relative nobody over the smw with the greatest abilities ever.

Jones was washed up, no doubt about it, but was still smart enough and game enough to go 12 rounds on the backfoot.