John Ruiz, James Toney, Tarver 1, past ir but still decent Virgil Hill, Griffin, Malinga, etc. he didn't fight "better" competition when he was old as hell. Roy Jones Jr was clearly washed compared to when he was in his prime or at least well past it. Anybody wilk an iq above 50 can compare prime Jones vs the Jones in the Calzaghe fight and see that. Funny how you're calling an old Hopkins a hopkins in his prime when before the Calzaghe fight he was old and beaten more decisively by Taylor. Hopkins wasn't in his prime for either fight
I genuinely don't know what this means but let's just parse this a little bit so that we can have a real discussion and not just an Internet bickering session that goes nowhere and doesn't ever figure anything out and progress the common understanding. I consider James Toney to be a great middleweight but then he got very fat and after moving up in class, still was cutting far too much weight to be in any shape to fight any great fighters. When he met Jones at super middleweight? OMG, he was just a fat, drained guy, not the lean mean fighting machine he was when he beat Second. And that's RJJ's best win, really. Which is crazy. So, he comes back after finally facing Tarver and he is finally forced to fight really good guys after that, like a lateblooming onion in Hopkins and the guy from the Russian navy who look like Jay Leno that sparked him but was really better than anyone in RJJ's first undefeated streak. There is a reason why he never fought that first euro king in DM. I think we all know that.
You cant break down almost ANYONES resume in that manner. Argument holds no weight to back up your stance. Resume wise he didn't start loosing because he started facing "better fighters" That is what this quote is trying to say am i correct ? Like i said, wins over Ruiz, Johnson, Malinga, Griffin, Hill, and beat Gonzalez, the same Gonzalez who beat Michalczewski am i correct ? And don't say Michalczewski was past it because you're the one trying to downplay RJJs career by bringing up losses when he was clearly past it. And yes Ruiz is a great win because RJJ is a former middle weight and moved up to heavyweight and took a world title by schooling. Highly doubt Calzaghe would beat John Ruiz at heavyweight. And Jones was 35 when he lost the (rematch) against Tarver and his style relied heavily on athleticism which is why he didn't age well unlike Calzaghe Lmao Whats next ? Hopkins was never that good and got exposed by Kovalev and Joe Smith Jr ? No wait you're agenda is probably to make Calzaghe look good so you'll say probably say old Hopkins was prime against Calzaghe
Yeah, well Robinson absolutely didn't want to fight Charley Burley, though he was probably the best possible opponent for him for a large swathe of his career. He didn't fancy Burley AND he didn't sign the contract. Anyone who thinks that this means Robinson would almost certainly lose - sorry - is a bit simple. Tyson had a huge fight available for him against a wildly past-prime George Foreman. By all accounts, he was spooked by Cus's chat about his ability to beat George Foreman. He never signed the contract, and he was spooked, but anyone who wants to provide Foreman with a walkover against Tyson despite these facts is a silly billy. Harry Greb pursued Jack Dempsey relentlessly from before the Willard fight through most of his reign. Dempsey was spooked by Greb and said he would "need to be at his absolute best" to take him on and showed a preference for opponents Greb had thrashed over Greb himself - he did not sign the contract! Anyone who thinks Greb should be handed a walkover of Dempsey DKSAB. Similarly, Calzaghe was unquestionably impressed by Roy's genius, and nor did he "sign for the fight" but this adding up to a definite loss makes absolutely no more sense than the examples above. What you are saying is not real. It's not reality.
You have to rate him, he achieved a lot in his career, and did things most fighters can only dream of, went out on his terms and undefeated at that. Got to give him massive credit and respect.
This is nonsense. It is based on nothing but hearsay and third hand opinions. Calzaghe stating that he did not want "difficult fights" is what gives credence to people like @Loudon . From The Mirror dated June 1, 1999:
Yeah, this is pure strawman, i'm not saying Calzaghe wanted the fight and i'm not having that argument, i'm saying that him not wanting that fight absolutely does not preclude him winning that fight if he fought it.
This argument is ridiculous and surreal. Joe Calzaghe is one of the best fighters of his era (Ranked top 3 p4p by RING), one of the four or five best SMWs of all time, locked, and i'm talking to someone who thinks this pish is somehow valid or helpful. I absolutely dismiss your chances of beating Roy Jones, unless you are a 30 fight professional incognito. Anyone who dismisses Calzaghe's chances of beating Roy Jones in the same way is a bit lost.
Your opinion doesn't matter when probability is being considered... Calzaghe is on record saying he didn't want to fight Jones, unless life changing money was offered. I am not like the ones who disparage a boxer for making steady money but after taking Calzaghe's words and actions into consideration nobody will give him good chance of beating late 90s Roy. Ward would have a better chance of beating Roy.