Which of these fighters faced the worst calibre opposition?

calslappy is my pick :good

 

Hopkins lost to JT in contreversial fashion. Hopkins also beat the turd out of Pavlik, and Winky.

Calzaghe beating Hopkins is alot more impressive than Cotto beating any of the fighters on his resume, even if Hopkins had two contreversial losses to JT.

 

There really isn't much between Calzaghe beating Hopkins and Cotto beating Mosley in terms of quality of win. They are very closely matched. Had Calzaghe actually beaten Hopkins, I'd give the edge to Calzaghe because I think at this point Hopkins is a slightly better boxer p4p than Mosley, but I scored the fight to Hopkins by a point, so IMO Cotto's win over Mosley beats anything on Cal's resume.

But keep in mind that this thread is not about resume. A discussion of resume takes into account wins and losses. This discussion is about calibre of opposition faced, therefore it does not take into account wins and losses but purely the quality of opposition faced. On this count, Calzaghe comes last for me...

...but it is important to note that Calzaghe held a world title from 1997-2008/9. He had far longer than Cotto or Hatton has had to compile his resume, and he still never bothered to fit in an acceptable number of fights against strong opposition despite having far longer to do so.

 

Guys like Pinto and Abdullaev would be around Mark Delaney in Calzaghe's best wins. Hyped up, never beat anyone, got beat, retired soon after.

 

Actually, Mosley had lost in dominant fashion to Forrest TWICE who is lower calibre than JT, and was dominated by Winky, and most people thought he lost clearly to ODLH.

On the other hand, Hopkins has been on top of his game, and his two losses to JT are contreversial, unlike Mosley's losses. So Hopkins has proved more by being champ longer and fighting better opposition than Mosley, and winning.

Hopkins is not slightly better than Mosley, he is a lot better. In terms of Legacy, resume, skill, and years of champion.

Funny how you don't give Calzaghe credit because you feel Hopkins won, but you seem to forget how close the Cotto-Mosley fight was, and that atleast half, if not more thought Mosley should have gotten the win against Cotto. Double standards.

Who has Cotto fought besides Mosley, who we've established is less than Hopkins? And if wins and losses don't matter, than why do you admit to ranking Calzaghe lower because you feel he lost to Hopkins?? :huh Read what you said below:

The above quoted was not the point, wether he had time or not, or how long this or that, according to YOU, it shouldn't matter...You're coming across as a hater now.

 

So, when you vote without bias, Cotto clearly has fought the lesser competition.

 

IT's very close between Calzaghe and Cotto.

- Calzaghe

- Cotto

 

That's why I rarely ever make a thread with a POLL, rarely if ever. I would rather leave the POLL out and get a smart debate, than a bunch of groupies, haters, or tards just clicking away and not backing their shiz up.

 

lol almost everybody voted calzaghe and it was the right answer:good

 

I voted Cotto but having thought about it more, I think its Calzaghe. Cotto has the more solid resume overall although Calzaghes top 3 wins are better than Cotto's top 3.

 

And including Cotto in the poll made practically no sense.

He's by far the youngest on the list, and will, conservatively, fight 5 or 6 more career defining fights once it is all said and done, probably against top 10 opposition in his weight class. Which happens to be a division which is currently, and will be in the future, loaded beyond belief.

People aren't voting for Cotto because inside of two or three years, his caliber of opposition and Joe's, over the entire course of their respective careers, won't even be close.

 

So you have a crystal ball eh? :hey

 

IMO its Calzghe..Dont get me wrong...Joe is a good fighter but his wins get very overrated.

 

Nah, a magic 8 ball...

I just shook it and it said Cotto SD12 Clottey. :smoke