Why do people hate Joe Calzaghe?

Look at the posts on the other forum. People spout the same crap about Mayweather as they do withe Calzaghe. I'm really bored of making this argument but Mitchell, Reid, Brewer, Woodhall, Eubank, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins, Jones...

So Eubank was past his prime, Lacy was overrated, Hopkins was 43....yawn.

So given that rational, Pac gets no credit for beating a washed up DLH, Hopkins beat a vastly overrated Pavlik, Mosley only beat a hyped up Margarito...You twist the outcome of anything if you really want to. The fact remains Calzaghe is 46-0 having beaten everyone put in front of him.

 

Arranging a fight with a man he himself described as being shot 4 years earlier in his autobiography was bordering on despicable. The mind truly boggles that boxing fans such as yourself don't find that deplorable. If Manny Pacquiao arranged a fight right now with Jose Luis Castillo or another fight with Erik Morales, I'd be ****ing disgusted and would say so. But Manny would never fool and **** his own fans like Joe did.

 

His explanation of that was that Roy had had a few wins and looked good beating Trinidad ( not saying he did myself before you bite my head off ).
I don't understand why you get so wound up by Calzaghe, any mention of him sees you foaming at the mouth. Dunno what your definition of despicable is but fighting a willing legend for millions of pounds when he himself is getting on is not despicible.

 

Stonerose you are so much better than swallowing that very obvious lie from Joe C. Jones had outpointed Prince Nobody (now retired), outpointed Hanshaw (KO'd in 5 in his next fight) and failed to stop an old fat welterweight who hadn't fought in 3 years or won a fight in 4 years. The explanation was utter bull****, pure and simple, designed to fool his idiotic fans. Please do not align yourself with the fools, you do know better deep down.

I'm sorry, but I stand by my position on this 100%. In Calzaghe's autobiography written in 2007, he was explaining why he didn't fancy fighting Tarver and Johnson and his reason was that all they had done was beat a shot Roy Jones and that meant nothing as Jones was shot. A year later, Jones is a legend and Jones v Calzaghe is a superfight. He fooled his fans into believing it was a legitimate contest when really it was a ****ing farce, and he delighted his fans by dancing around like a knob whilst slapping around the bloodied corpse of a once-great fighter. Repugnant.

 

Dude, calm the **** down surely you've got more important things in your life to get worked up about! Yes it was a **** poor excuse, the reason he fought Jones was because he could make much more money doing that then if he fought anybody else. Obviously he couldn't say that because he was trying to promote the fight. That was the biggest earner out there for him and that's why he did it.

 

I remember saying that Jones had bounced back with three great wins.

Two of those were against puddings, the other against a shot to bits, 3 years inactive Trinidad.

 

Yawn.

Just giving my opinion mate, no tears and no heart attacks, just my thoughts on the subject.

 

Exactly. I don't understand how anyone can respect a man who stands in front of a tv camera and purposefully tells lies to make his fans pay for tickets and travel to line his own pockets. He lied to legitimize that fight and his fans bought it en masse. It was an immoral sham, a sad sad night for boxing.

 

Comparitively incredible?

 

You won't ever find a post where I've praised Calzaghe for taking the Jones fight because I never agreed with it because of Jones being way past it. but calling it despicable is going way too far, boxing is a business as well as a sport and you can't really blame him for doing it even if you don't agree.

As I said at the time Pavlik was the fight to make for me because he was the ideal one dimensional straight come forward fighter that Joe eats for breakfast and he would have looked great beating him up in a similar fashion to what Hopkins did to him.

 

I respect him cos i love boxing and i especially love one of ours doing well.
I will give you that he shouldn't have fought Jones. I think in time he'll regret not fighting Pavlik instead , he would have beaten him handily and maybe would have a bit of slack cut from his critics and earned the plaudits that Hopkins got instead.

 

:good

 

But I would have said that Pavlik is horribly over-rated.... Banger yes.... But nowhere near the phenom people made him out to be. He would have been blasted by Mclellon and all the non-descrip champs of the late nineties. Hopkins did all the hard work in that division, blew it fighting like a **** against Taylor and Taylor -because he ain't that good got tagged by Pavlik then boxed like a hermit in the return. Pavlik will get streched again very soon. I'm no hater, I quite like him but his boxing skill is very poor.

 

That's the ironic thing, Jones probably gave Calzaghe a tougher fight than Pavlik would've.

 

Spot on that.

He did indeed "drop a bollock" with that fight decision no doubt.