The Reasons Why Calzaghe never faced a top fighter.

Bika?

 

don't forget as well that johnson and tarver are no spring chickens, so dawson certainly isn't a better scalp than pavlik for my mind anyway.

calzaghe deserves credit for beating lacy (and kessler of course), but neither lacy nor kessler have proved their worth at the top level - and lacy never will.

i've actually sent an e-mail to someone in kessler's crew and if i get a reply i'll post it on the site.

 

:goodDamn well said! good to see not all americans have the same opinion on that point!

 

calzaghe never beat a proven world class fighter in his prime.

he deserves props for lacy and kessler because they were dangerous contenders, but neither have proved anything since.

and hopkins was a well timed attack on a faded great. if you disagree i'd like to hear it.

 

A faded great that whooped the **** out of Pavlik a few months later?

Yet Pavlik is this supposedly great win (better than Dawson?!)

I'm not sure how this makes sense.

 

fighters need to be known in this country(US) because it's just good business.
this is the 'centre of the world' for any fighter who wants to make his name.

and i'm an australian who fought amateurs for about 9 years, travelled rough out of a backpack for about 7 more through western europe, a bit of jordan, egypt, texas (to see a mate) and settled in denmark.

it's not about checking other countries out in the fight game - it's about being talented enough to back yourself to go to where the money is made and where people can notice you.

i agree a bit of life experience in other countries can broaden people's horizon's - i'm all for that - but if you want to be a boxer and you want to be taken seriously on the world stage you need to court the US market.

EDIT : fought Am's about 7 years..not 9

 

hopkins is a great fighter for a reason.

i didn't say he was dead in the water and hopkins beating pavlik adds to hopkins' legacy because it's truly incredible (even though he's a total gymnrat) that he has this longevity.

 

Thats the reality. I dont understand why posters here cant see that and its certainly not even worth debating. It took Joe the best part of 13 years to even become a semi-household name. And even thats up for debate as he never fought on terrestrial TV as often as British fighters in years gone by. Bear in mind Joe had a fear of flying and point blank refused to travel. When a few mil was dangled infrom of him that few went. Oddly enough i remember when he fought Kevin McyIntyre on the Tyson Nielsen undercard. That fight was in Norway or Denmark. Im pretty sure he and SN didnt drive across the continent for that woefully inept bout.:think

 

So why would it have been better to beat Pavlik? Just because he's 28 or whatever he is, and therefore a world class fighter in his "prime" - this ambiguous word.

What does prime and world class mean if a faded legend is still better than you? A great fighter is a great fighter. Calzaghe fought the best guy he could at the time, and he's since been justified in taking that decision.

 

IMO the usa boxing market has shrunk rapidly in the last 5 years and is shrinking into itself even more with promoters like arum putting pavlik type fighters on ppv in front of just 80 to 100 k viewers.

the average american ppv is now about 250k and a big fight not on ppv gets 1.3 million viewers .

and this is for homegrown american fighters.

when foreign fighters fight on american tv , they do worse exposure and ratings wise than american fighters.

for me america was the place to be 1970`s/80`s/early 90`s.

but american PPV has killed boxing as a sport to mainstream america and it is now just a small hardcore following, half of which is more intrested in latino fighters.

do you really make a name for yourself as a boxer fighting in front of a few thousand americans and maybe 1 million tv viewers ?

 

because calzaghe is the only legitimate champion i can think of who never took this chance.

prime is ambiguous, i agree, but pavlik was the man who beat the man who beat the man.

joe never beat the man who beat any man - in his 'prime'.

joe himself talks about legacy, but he's not a stupid person and he cheapens it when he says it because he consciously knows he played the numbers.

 

Calzaghe has always and will always be under scrutiny, but wont all of frank warrens playthings? look at the big picture, fat boy warren has wrecked more legacies than created them with his super-corrupt match-making. (not just his own fighters, wtf was feeding barrera to khan?)

Frank warrens boxing matches are usually "Age vs Youth" "Size vs Experience" or some other skirmish between fighters attributes more than their actual boxing skill. Of course with the odds thouroughly stacked FOR* his own man

Im firmly of the belief though ,being a former critic of Joe(oh yes, i was of the "joe-calslappy" band,**** i was president of it) that he would have been more than able of hanging in with the big boys on his own.

*EDIT

 

good post.

but don't forget boxing is a minority sport in the bigger picture.

with arum and oscar willing to negotiate fights now that makes a lot of people happy becasue real fights are being made.

even if there is a wane in popularity, arum, oscar and the US is still where boxing thrives most.

i'm not saying it's right that fighters have to come to the US to make their name, but it's good business.

 

Actually, Hopkins beat Tarver who was by consensus considered the man, and then Joe beat him some time later.

I still don't buy that beating a "prime world class" fighter is somehow better than beating a faded legend if the faded legend is since proven to be far superior. There is not much common sense in that, we are getting too worried about definitions rather than what happens in the ring. Hopkins is consensus top 5 p4p right now, and rightly so.

Calzaghe should have fought a better depth of competition, that is my mine problem with him. I can't criticize him for fighting Hopkins, Hopkins is the best guy between 160 and 175.

 

thats right.

but look how quickly ricky hatton changed his career once he left warren.

was it 3 fights and then he got floyd?

and all he did was say "**** it! i'm going to find out how good i can be".

calzaghe is probably a better fighter than hatton (i think he is), but i have 10 times the respect for hatton for his career choices.