Is Joe Calzaghe a H.O.F fighter...and is Cal a legend, an ATG, or great fighter?

Calzaghe is none of the above....he had a great slap!

 

Yeah those pitty pat slaps don't do nuthin right......

This content is protected

 

Quoted because this likely would have been my post on this topic, but this sums up my opinion rather nicely.

 

Who is Joe?

 

Calzaghe is an ATG period, champion for more than a decade with out one single loss, i mean do you know how hard it is to obtain that in this sport? especially when you are fighting the best in your divison.

 

he's a great fighter and hall of famer but not on the level of a few other fighters off the top of my head i would say Jones (obviously), Hopkins, Pacquiao are all on another level.

 

This content is protected

 

I think he is an all time great and a hall of famer.

 

The general standard of his opposition was not terrible, but it was weak.

No, he didn't. He fought one single top quality fighter in their prime - Kessler. And Kessler was no peak Roy Jones or peak Bernard Hopkins.

In his own division: Ottke, Echols. In the divisions around him: prime Jones, prime Hopkins, Michalczewski, Taylor, Pavlik, Wright, G.Johnson, Tarver, Dawson, Froch..... There were many.

Anytime in the SIX YEARS between 1997 and 2003. atsch

Typically irrelevant and meaningless woffle. Yawn. Next.

Nope, Calzaghe fought a mixture of weak (Thornberry), mediocre (Sheika) and decent opposition (Brewer).

Nope. Those guys had balls and hunger.

As previously stated, there were: Jones, Hopkins, Ottke, Michalczewski, Taylor, Pavlik, Wright, G.Johnson, Tarver, Dawson, Froch....

Stop lying. These men were fighting in and around Calzaghe's division between 1997 and now, and many of them fought each other.

You are convincing no-one with this. Why did so many of the guys I mentioned manage to fight each other?

Calzaghe never chased the big fights and the best comp 1997-2006. That's NINE YEARS. This is undeniable.

He did not have the skill, jab or bodypunching of an elite fighter. Good in those areas but not great. He had great handspeed, workrate, and a pretty good chin.

True. Hopkins and Toney have had more fights, fought better comp, been down less, and have never been KO'd either, and they were from the same era, so Calzaghe's is not an incredible achievement, just a good one.

If a win over Byron Mitchell is an example of greatness, then Richard Hall, Sven Ottke and Bruno Girard are great too. Talk sense!

atsch Predictably pathetic.

HOF yes. ATG? No, not IMO.

Your issues with race and race classification are weird. This is well-known on this forum.

Just stupid.

So Calzaghe is a level above Tommy Hearns?? The final nail in the coffin of a truly shite post.


Nice to see your maintaining your recent form, successfully defending your title of the least respected poster on the ESB!

:happy:happy:happy

 

I'd put Joe C between 75-110....His biggest wins were over an undefeated Kessler, a tough Jeff Lacy, and 2 old men...!! HOF fighter for me...

 

I used the knocked out criteria when comparing the two, and who did Hearns beat that was better than Hop? Duran can't be used because he was a former lightweight legend past his prime.

 

very good at sport of boxing (the goal being to outpoint your opponent), not a "legend", average opposition but a handful of very good ws and no defeats, one of the best of his era (mid 90's to mid 2000's) and should have some type of ranking all time.

 

Calzaghe would beat Hearns ass. Cal was too big for Hearns, and would eat his right hand if Hearns landed it. Cal would go to Tommy's body and it would be all over.

 

surely a HOFer, but im not sure where i'd put him in ATG list. maybe between 80 - 120

 

...