Better WBO title reign

Calzaghe. Just.

 

Calzaghe held the title for 10 years though and made more defences.

EDIT:

And Calzaghe's WBO reign was absolutely shite...It's so easy to forget how woeful it was when you can only remember the end.

I guess the question is was Kessler a better win than any of naz's?

The Lacy win was magnificent but he was **** in hindsight.

 

Why didn't you just make a thread telling us why Hamed's reign was better?

Seriously though, you make a good point but there's a lot of hair splitting. A lot of B level fighters on both lists imo.

 

Definitely, and fighters fighting out of their weight class like Mccullough and Bungu.

 

if you think calzaghe was **** you know nothing about boxing mate jack ****,lacy was a top operator and joe schooled him,he was also fantastic against kessler who beat a peak froch, i rest my case!

 

He didn't say Calzaghe was ****. Learn to read.

 

Naz.

 

he suggests that calzaghe's reign was **** is that implying hes a good boxer? And i can read perfectly well thank you wee man

 

Definitely didn't say Calzaghe was ****.

Holding the title for 10 years with over twenty defences is awesome but when you look through who he defended against, so many of them had no business being in a world title fight. I am a fan of calzaghe's and when the op posted the list of names he beat I thought they must've missed some so boxrec'ed it, nope he didn't miss any, the rest had no business being in the ring with him.

Like I said, the lacy win was magnificent, but in hindsight he was overrated, he's done nothing since.

So in terms of reigns it's a case of do you rate kessler over any of naz's wins?

Calzaghe was a fantastic fighter and I am a big fan, but I'm just trying to be objective, helped by the fact I'm comparing him to another of my favourite fighters.

 

no probs mate,lacy was class you now until joe gave him a severe beating, pyscologically lacy's now maybe a baten man thats down to joe's superior ability on the night they fought,naz fought far to many non punching super bantam weights imo as well for my liking to compare him to calzaghe.:good

 

a question. what naz performance comes remotely close to calzaghes performances over lacy or kessler?

 

I think they both fought less than their fair share of punchers really.

A lot of Calzaghe's opponents were at the *** end of their career (as were some of Hamed's in fairness) and very few did anything afterwards.

Lacy was never that good, Kessler has gone 4-1 since including a good win over Froch so that win stands up, Hopkins (who beat him) only really has the Pavlik win who lost to Martinez in his next decent fight..... don't even mention Jones.

I'd say they are about even in all honesty, neither beat as many top class fighters as they could have...... the list of opponents not faced is filled with more prominent names than those faced.

Hamed didn't fight Morales, Marquez or Pacquiao.

Calzaghe didn't fight (live versions) of Jones, Hopkins.... Taylor, Ottke etc.

 

Naz had plenty of equally dominant and stoppage wins against opponents at a similar level to lacy, who just wasnt very good