Which really just shows your ignorance on this subject. People have different points of views. Just because you say yours is right, does not make it so, and it certainly does not make it a more noble and worthwhile cause than the person that argues the reverse.
You disagree with what? That his resume is very good but not great, or that he could conceivably have fought some more quality opposition before he retired?
Agreed it wasn't his finest hour. The quote in his biog about RJJ was made at a time when Jones was indeed considered a spent force, not just by Calzaghe, but by the whole boxing world. The fight was made and at that time RJJ was attempting a come back, albeit by beating low level opponents. Calzaghe was merely selling the fight as every fighter does. At the end of the day both JC and RJJ decided on the fight and they both made a lot of money out of it. This was the plan all along and it was pretty obvious to most of the sporting world that this was the case and that the fight had no real meaning. Those who bought the fight only have themselves to blame, not Joe Calzaghe.
Yawn. You are wriggling like a worm on a hook trying to avoid the issue. Is it acceptable or not to present a fight as a legitimate contest when you are fighting a man you said was shot years ago, shot to the extent that wins over him by other fighters years ago were worthless? Is that acceptable or is it deplorable? I just don't understand why liking Joe Calzaghe's fighting style blinds you to this obvious truth.
There is nothing to defend, because nobody forces you to watch the fight. They both knew what the result would be, they both knew they'd get a lot of money. That was the top and bottom of it. I can think of more deplorable things going on in the world, and boxing, to tell the truth. But then this is you with Calzaghe, like a moth to a flame. And like me with Hatton. But I acknowledge my hate of Huggy Bear. You protest objectivity.
Someone refers to my ignorance, and I ask them a straight question. Not exactly street warfare, is it?
Perhaps not, but without wishing to cause offence, you do find it remarkably easy to pick a fight. You make Scurlaruntings seem like the P4P most passive poster on any forum.
I don't really know what to say to that. Erm, thanks for the comments on my personality. Do you have any more or can we get back to the subject at hand?
atsch Didn't I just defend it? That would infer I find it acceptable, if not ideal. I would rather he had of fought somebody else. But at the end of the day I realise it was just one fight where two men made a lot of money.
I'm sure I read somewhere recently Ricky Hatton saying that Marco Antonio Barrera was shot. If Hatton suddenly announced a superfight against MAB, would you apply the same principle as you are now?? Laughable. atsch
I wouldn't really give a **** over and above any of Hatton's other fights. He'd be the same hugging, cheating and annoying personality that I find him to be now. His opposition isn't my main annoyance, thats been just as soft as Calzaghe's for a great period, there is an ingrained acceptance of reality that neither fought anywhere near the depth of opponent they could and should.