do you still consider Calzaghe vs Lacy an upset?

any ibf champ today facing someone with a worthless title like wbf would be an upset, whats the problem here?

 

Calzaghe was WBO champ for a long time. He was established.

 

Obviously

 

Like a lot of "upsets" It was not an upset to fans who knew both fighters.

This division had been dominated by Europeans...and Calzaghe was Lacys first European.

Lacy was the next big thing, the people who didn't know Calzaghe were all convinced, and WITHOUT Calzaghe everything was in place for Lacy to realise this "being the next big thing".

Joe ruined a good fighter who a lot of people were sold on, who had everything going his own way careerwise.

If you knew Calzaghe, you knew he was proven. The division didn't get unifications back then so it was impossible to decide on a stand out champion. yet Joe was still the consistent champion. You knew he was an unbeaten champion looking for a defining fight. He already beat Woodhall, Eubanks, Charles Brewer, Byron Mitchell and Robin Reid who had all been champions. Joe also wiped out Omar Sheika when he was being touted as a future champion.

Somehow all this meant nothing in America.

Then an exciting younger champion from America who is getting the unification pathway that Calzaghe always wanted comes along...

On paper, Calzaghe v Lacy was 50-50 if you knew both fighters.

 

calz

just calzaghe didnt want unification at all, he wanted to keep his wbo title to stay unbeaten. He only sought unification when he had no choice.

ahd he left the wbo and tried to unify, the defeats would have happened very quickly.

 

No Herrol. It's foolish to blame the fighter. PPV TV and Casino money in America was all that could enable championship Unifications and it was only going to be invested in an American fighter.

The Super Middlewight division was still a European no man's land back then. All the titles stood split. With one promoter each controlling the destiny of a belt, and liking it that way.

The Germans were quite happy to keep things over there with Sven Ottke, Marcus Beyer, the Danes had Kessler and the UK had Reid, Calzaghe, Woodhall.

The Americans were in the dark because they had no SM guys worth anything since Jones and Toney outgrew the division.. Until Lacy came along. He was The first guy to make waves from those shores since Gerald mcclenan was allowed to leapfrog his way into having Nigel Benn served to him on a plate.

 

established as a wbo titlist carried little weight before 2005. So his established time was only a year or two, less than lacy.

 

But, I think Calzaghe could have come over to the US sooner, or gone to other parts of Europe sooner. He stayed in UK.

I do remember thinking he was protected, although he had beaten some good competition.

Bottom line, he fought Jones and Hopkins when they were WAY past their best.

And Lacy was overhyped.

Those and maybe Reid are his best wins, in my opinion.

 

So, I somewhat agree with Herol.

But, unlike Herol, I think Calzaghe was established for a few years before beating Lacy

I was pointing out that the WBO title was somewhat legitimate, unlike the WBF or whatever Herol had stated.

 

It may be that many people thought that Jeff Lacey was a good fighter before he had a bout with Joe Calzaghe, but it quickly became very obvious that those people were very wrong while the bout was taking place. In fact, Lacey
was essentially a human punching bag when facing a top fighter.

- Chuck Johnston

 

I dont regard belts at all, it is the only way. Just because a guy has not achieved Ring Magazine championship recognition it dosnt mean he isn't good or has not beaten better opponents for a longer time than who ever the Americans were boosting.

Lacy had 21 fights. His two best wins were over guys Calzaghe already beat.

Look at the time line and the ratings of that division. You had champions with no greater status than each other, all fighting the same guys. Now, You can dismiss the belts but not the opponents.

Just because Calzaghe had not yet "caught on" in America it did not mean he had not already beat Byran Mitchell, Robin Reid, Ritchie Woodhall, Charles Brewer and Chris Eubank.

Like I said BEFORE, it was only an upset if you did not know both guys...

The Super Middleweight class was largely a European strong hold after Toney and Jones moved up. These were the guys to beat. If you dismiss them, you get results like Calzaghe v Lacy

 

Both were overrated. No upset.

 

smw just wasnt taken seriously by the established americans becasue it was both traditionally weak, and inherently embyronic monetarily and in depth, you'd need someone like Lacy, a weak american titlist and failed olympian who was made to be beaten, to make the crossover to europe. joe had little to do with making that crossover, it was all lacy and him thinking he was the bigger fish in the small pool.

I think you can put some weight on the type of belt, or else why is wbf completely unregarded like the wbo was in the 90s. of course the fighters ability to the crux though, and if observed over several years to fall in line with the level of the belt, its not wrong to surmise the ability of the fighter to close to that belt too.

 

No, I predicted Calzaghe would stop him in 7 rounds, so the only real shock for me was that Lacy went the distance.

 

the most suprising thing was joes complete inability to put away a helpless opponent. It dawned on me then that joe had relied on his welsh pals to award him fake stoppages for many years previous.