Observations on Joe Calzaghe's career.

I've never seen anyone make Hopkins look like that before

In all seriousness didnt he land over 1000punches and not manage to stop him?

 

I'm sure someone off that list might of had the style to beat Joe. I think one of the problems with Joes opposition is that with split titles your gonna get people sitting on them. It could be said that other champs during Joe's reign never fought Joe, Ottke for example.
I don't consider Joe an ATG, like I said in my first post, his opposition wasn't the greatest but he went unbeaten over 15 years against decent opposition.
I just take umbrage over people calling his opposition "crap" (Russell) This is the "classic" forum not the "general".

 

Doesn't mean his punches were totally ineffective though does it.
Anyone who saw that fight knows it was a rare master-class and that the punches were anything but ineffective.
So much hate. All this **** about being " totally out-skilled " by Hopkins. It was a close fight which Joe won. Get the **** over it.
And this 43 year old thing that people spout on about, conveniently forgetting that Bernard went out and put a master-class on in his very next fight against a well regarded up and comer.
Revisionist history is shite.I hate it.

 

Kessler was the big fight and I thought his toughtest test....moving up in weight at mid 30's beating ( a prime B-Hop and dominating a past prime Jones impressive.....Best fighter out of Europe? He is up there best @ 165...IMO

 

I don't need to defend Joes punching. If you want to believe an undefeated fighter can't punch i'll leave you to it.
You don't half wind me up sometimes D. Every Calzaghe thread ( and there's been too many already ) you pop up saying the same thing over and over and over again.

 

Ok lets all look at it from this perspective. Yes Joe has 2 ATG's on his resume, but we all know he should get no real credit for the Jones fight. His fans seem to not understand, when a fighter is shot, and you fight them when you are at the top of division, and they haven't even EARNED this fight, the win is not going to mean much in term of legacy. It would be the same as saying Jones victory against Mike "The Body Snatcher" McCallum has any real merit.

Lets make the comparison!

Jones was at the top, p4p status, and the champ, as far as people were concerned at LHW. Jones fought McCallum in 96, when Mike was 40 years old. Well past it. But this fight with McCallum, in facts has more relevance or is a better VICTORY than Joe's win over Jones. Why? Because not only did McCallum show he had more than the verison of Jones Joe fought, but also -- HE WAS STILL RANKED -- and just 2 years ago before his fight WITH Jones he beat Jeff Harding for the LHW belt!

Now lets consider Jones. Since getting KO'D by Tarver in 04, went on to get KO'd by Glen Johnson, then loss a UD to Tarver again. Then later fought some weak, not top 10 rated, one of which was not even top 20 ranked guys and beat a blown up 3 year inactive, and unranked Trinidad. And fought Joe in 08. So late see, for 4 years Jones had done nothing and was a shell of his former self.

OK! Now most experts don't give Jones credit for beating this version of the McCallum, why should Joe get credit for beating the version of Jones he did then? McCallum, at that point, was a far better win, being that he was still ranked, and just 2 years ago was LHW champ, but obviously shot. Going on about the Jones victory is like saying Jones victory over McCallum was some achievement. It wasn't!

 

Who is going on about the Jones fight ?

 

If totally out-skilling a fighter is leading with your head and your elbows, feigning injury and being out-thought and ultimeatly defeated then yes Hopkins totally out-skilled Joe Calzaghe.

atsch

 

Agreed to an extent, his comp was pretty dire from 2001-2006 he fought 2 ranked opponents, both coming off losses. Allot of 168lbers could have been unbeaten against his 2001-2006 opposition. The '06-'08 career is Calzaghe's real legacy, some very impressive fighters hes faced but each 1 has question marks against them

Lets also not forget Otke also retired undefeated and from '98-'04, Otke fought at a far higher level.

 

The remark that got you all hot and bothered was that Calzaghe was 'flailing like a ******', which was Russell's comment on his technique, inaccuracy and ineffectiveness in the Hopkins fight. Digging up some photo of Jeff Lacy with a bloody nose is neither here nor there, so just you settle petal. My gran could've landed on Lacy without too much difficulty (and she could maybe have stopped him too, had she got hundreds and hundreds of clean shots to his head).

I'm not 'under' it. It must simply be a lack of knowledge of boxing if you don't think Hopkins is a more skilled fighter than Calzaghe and was the more skilled man in the ring that night, irrespective of whether you thought he edged the decision or not.

Hopkins put on a masterclass against Pavlik because Pavlik allowed a 43-year-old to fight at his own pace, like Tarver and Wright did. Calzaghe managed to set a pace that a 40+ year old fighter found difficult, like Taylor did. That was the sum total of his achievements in the ring that night.

Analysis which is more accurate than your tired Union Jack flag-waving does not constitute revionist history.

 

Fanboys hit the Classic...

This content is protected

 

If you don't need to defend Joe's punching, then why did you leap to his defence then, posting your photo of Jeff Lacy with a bloody nose??

 

You complain about people ridiculing Calzaghe's performance and then pull the same trick against BHOP

The simple facts about the fight are:

Calzaghe had a very very low connect rate, ignore the stats and watch the fight and see how many punches Joe lands clean to the head. BHOPs is a defensive master but Joe does show holes in his game

Hopkins landed very very clean right hands down the pipe. They were very flush and they knocked Joes head back, Joe never managed to snap Hopkins head back in a similar way. Interestingly Hopkins joked during a set of boxing interviews that showed boxers demonstrating techniques, 'Look out for the right hand Joe', basically saying Joe was open to the right. This was before the fight was even on the cards

I scored it to Hopkins and wide because he landed the far cleaner more effective punches. And yes he did make Calazghe look the amateur at times

 

Because you, a supposed boxing enthusiast said Calzaghe's punches basically have no effect whatsoever.Simple really.

 

has chris byrd ever been interviewed about that. :huh