Calzaghe v Canelo

Charles Brewer had more power than Canelo, Calzaghe was better than Bivol is.

 

It’s still a lame excuse. Joe was factually 36 years old and not in his prime either. You can’t say one guy isn’t in his prime while ignoring the other guy isn’t as well. That math doesn’t add up.

 

I’d have rather they both fought at their best. But it didn’t happen and no amount of making excuses about Jones gives him a win.

 

Anyone can see Roy wasn't anywhere near prime. He did not commit on a single punch in that combo. Thinking instead of reacting. Getting knocked senseless does that. But Joe was not prime either. Too bad these guys didn't meet 6-7 years earlier.

 

Roy`s forearm floored Calzaghe, he wasn`t hurt.

 

Exactly - it doesn't tell you what a prime-vs-prime fight would've looked like, but it's not like you're using a prime fighter against a washed up elite to make someone look better than they are.

 

Calzaghe by UD too much workrate, too skillfull, footwork, angles, etc. Canelo would be baffled by the Welshman.

 

I remember reading this from Joe when Froch called him out (again)

"I think I'd have beaten any super-middleweight, maybe not Roy Jones Jr at his peak."

Joe Calzaghe responds to former rival Carl Froch's surprise call-out - Mirror Online

He might not have beaten Roy but I'd like to think Jones would have known he'd been in a fight.

 

Calzaghe fanatics often use this kind of sophistry to try and make the Jones win look better or more significant than it was. Pure sleight of hand stuff.

Fighters hit the skids at different stages - just because one fighter declines by an enormous chunk in their mid thirties, it doesn't mean all will. Of course, the Calzaghe fans know this perfectly well, but they have to play dumb and act as if they don't for the sake of venerating Calzaghe being able to slap Jones' charred remains around.

Calzaghe had arguably achieved his two best career wins in the year preceding the Jones fight, whereas Jones hadn't had a decent win in over five years. Calzaghe's stock was a the highest it had ever been in 2008, whereas Jones was widely acknowledged as being washed up and had been on the end of a couple of bad knockouts. If Calzaghe had slid past his prime it wasn't by much and he'd obviously maintained his level very well as he aged, because everyone was raving about his performance against Kessler not long beforehand. Whereas if you're a boxing fan you just had to watch Jones' performances in the few years before the Calzaghe fight to know what he was done. The eye test beats the clever manipulation of numbers to hell in this case.

Calzaghe literally says in his autobiography which he wrote a couple of years beforehand that Jones was shot now, and there'd be nothing to gain in beating him now apart from a few quid. And still the Calzaghe fans won't hear it.

Calzaghe beat a washed up Jones, held all the advantages going in, was always likely to win what was a very low-risk fight, and the fight itself means nothing in weighing up how a fight between the pair might have gone a few years earlier, or prime for prime. I'm not saying that's all Calzaghe's fault, that he was a bum, or that this was good or bad - simply that this was the case.

 

Roy was pretty much shot. Calzaghe not so much. It's that simple. I don't want to keep explaining the same point over and over. People that act as if both were far from their prime dont understand that Calzaghe could still compete at the elite based on his previous fights and Jones could not based on his previous fights. Never said Calzaghe was prime but Calzaghe was not shot

Antonio Tarver did a more impressive job on Roy than Calzaghe did and didn't get dropped, and guess what ? Jones had already beaten Tarver beforehand.

 

C'mon, Roy was 52 there!