joe calzaghe's resume in years to come.

His legacy will be shredded. As it should be. He had a few decent wins, a few good wins and loads of crap.

 

hes basically the super middle weight veriosn of rocky marciano. only worse.

 

I fear his rep will get worse and worse as the years go on.

I always maintained that a lot would hang on Kessler's career, and that could still come out good, but Ward has already polished him pretty good in a bout.

Calzaghe is comparable to Ricardo "Finito" Lopez in my eyes, but the difference being that Ricardo, although he dominated a pretty weak division throughout his reign, looked like a million dollars doing it (Rosendo Alvarez aside).

Joe is a very good fighter though. Just maybe not a great.

 

Ward didn't just beat Kessler, he wiped the floor with him, sorry but that's the truth.

 

Still, Kessler is still in the mix of the Super Six... things can turn out different... he might still win it.

 

probably the same as roy jones.

 

Calzaghes resume doesn't look particularly impressive and I think a lot of wanabee pundits will remember this.

He's NOT one of the top 150 fighters to have lived IMO. Somewhere around the top British fighters of all time, though far behind the quality of say, Jim Driscoll, Lennox Lewis or even Jimmy Wilde and Benny Lynch, whose resumes aren't massively stacked (despite the large number of fights they both have)

I rank Calzaghe as high as I do mainly because of the attributes he displayed in his best performances, and the fact he was able to stop B-Hop doing his best work confirms to me was most definitely an Elite-Level performer.

His resume just isn't that great, and I don't give him a free pass because he was 'avoided'.

 

brilliant comparison, Lopez is another guy I hold in high reard only because of the attributes he displayed. There are only a few very good opponents on his resume, so I'd never hold him in as high regard as Chang :yep

Calzaghe isn't missing much. Just a few stellar wins nearer his prime, moving up to light heavy earlier and fighting Glen Johnson, Tarver and a closer-to-his-prime Roy, would've really proven Calzaghes 'level' IMO, whether he'd won or list.

Same with Lopez, if he'd just fought one of Chiquita or Carbajal I wouldn't have that hmmm, what if, feeling about him.

 

Jones has Toney, and a better level of 'good' wins on his resume (Hill, old Body Snatcher, greenish B-Hop) as well as a win against someone who was a top 5 Heavyweight at the time.

Add to that Jones looks possibly the most formidable fighter of all time at his 160-168 peak (was a great LHW but there are quite a few I'd pick to beat him there) and I think there's a miniscule chance Joe will ever be regarded anywhere near to Jones Jr.

 

Toney is criminally overrated IMO.

What top quality fighters did he actually beat in his ''prime'' - he was being tooled by Nunn, Jones whipped him, Griffin clearly outpointed him once and edged him out another time.

Between the Jones and Jirov fight there's absolutely **** all of note, unless you consider a shot McCallum a great win.

Plus he's a drug cheat and an annoying **** to boot.

 

I definitely agree that Toney had a shocking period post-Jones up until Jirov. He was horrible at 175.

But I feel he has proven himself a fantastic fighter. A small guy who can compete with Heavys. I also go for his excuse, I mean, his physique at that time did not exactly make it look like he was on any enhancements did it? Toney always got by on how sharp his skills were.

I also rate that Nunn win very highly. Toney was in that fight still, and against of operator of Nunns quality that punch cannot be underestimated.

Jim Corbett once said 'there are no chance blows.' I agree with him, it took a special fighter to pull that win out of his ass and Toney did it.

Jones schooled Toney. That says a lot about Jones, who 'did a Lacy' on pretty all of his opposition over a fair few years. Griffin was a decent competitor, he made things fairly difficult for a peak Jones in their first fight too.

Toneys performances against Tiberi and the like I cannot excuse. I haven't seen all 3 fights with McCallum, but TYSON DURAN is a poster who's opinions I respect massively and he says McCallum gets a fair share of the trilogy, with Toney only just proving his superiority over the series. Is Toney infallible? no.

But immensely skilled and (at that time) a massie scalp for Jones? IMO yes :good (not often I disagree with ya BB )

 

Great post.

The randomly high opinion that the world seemed to have continued right up until the time he was a mediocre heavyweight too. Even odds against Samuel Peter in their second fight.

 

Toney was a great fighter, not unbeatable but he was very, very cunning. Should have fought Hopkins they were both old school. I agree he's not as great as some people think though.

 

you can't argue with the statistics, beat everybody put in front of him, his style might not have been to everybodys liking but he got the job done, he's the most sucessfull boxer from the uk and his legacy can only be veiwed positively in years to come.

 

Sounds abit gay or French....


Calzaghe was a British great. Not a world great. Certainly one of the top 20 fighters we have ever produced. Calzaghes record is up there with any British fighter but not better.

If he had fought B-Hop and RJJ at a better time...even if he had lost to themn he would stand in a much higher place in most boxing fans eyes.