Better fighter: Johnny Tapia or Joe Calzaghe?

Uhhh, based on what exactly?

 

What tricks did Danny Romero have in his bag? I haven't watched to much of Romero, but I tend to think if he was as multi-dimensional as you are implying here then he'd have changed up against Tapia. He didn't do that. I have him down as a two-fisted banger with decent fundamentals.

If the elbow was the cause of the cut, then why wasn't it deemed a no-contest? According to Boxrec, Romero was up on all three scorecards.

Absolutely, but I thought it was to Kessler's credit as a fighter that he was able to redeem himself after the defeats to Joe Calzaghe and Andre Ward.

I was to hesitant to say, but Calzaghe has beat better opposition as well as showing a higher level of consistency throughout. I do believe however that Johnny was a better fighter than Joe, if only slightly, and all that rubbish from Assassin about Joe having a stronger will and a better chin is just that, rubbish. Baseless statements.

 

You'd be surprised how many bad stoppages calzaghe benefitted from. There was a thread a while back that highlighted about 5 or 6 of them with Youtube video links and I'm betting Calzaghe benefited from a lot more than just that handfull. Seems like all Joe had to do is keep his hands moving and, BOOM, another automatic TKO victory for his overrated ass.

 

1. calzaghe was in the ring with bigger punchers and was able to take them.. salem:calzaghe lost his head in a scrappy fight and got caught by two big shots.. he got up straight away with a clear head.mitchell: massive puncher had calzaghe down for the first time in his career.. calz got up in seconds and put a beating on him and stopped him.jones: calzaghe was 37 years old, he wasn't in his prime.got caught cold in the first round, got up and was able to take all of jones shots for the rest of the fight no probs.hopkins: well placed shot, nothing to do with calz chin.

2. got most of tapia's fights on dvd.. i know what i'm talking about.

3. your opinion

4. your opinion

5. i never said tapia couldn't adapt, i just said that calzaghe did it much better.

6.calzaghe fought loads of times on the back foot, he was a natural counter puncher.

 

I'm not a huge admirer of Joe Calzaghe's so-called lightning fast hands. When a fighter is shoe-shining, they can be seen to have much faster hands than they have in actuality. Watch when he throws single shots, there's nothing special there in regards to pure speed, whereas when Johnny threw in combination, his punches were measured, precise, and delivered with ferocity. I don't care enough about it to argue, there's not a great deal in it, but I'm not an advocate of Joe's so-called superior handspeed. I don't see it.

 

happy now **** head.

i really hate YOU for making me do that.

 

Jones Jr was in his prime, though. :rofl

Joe hit the deck more often than Tapia, not only because he wasn't as tough, but because he was more hittable, also.

What basis do you have for saying that Joe has a "better chin" than someone who hasn't been decked as often, or hurt as often?

Well I encourage you to start watching them.

What basis do you have for saying Calzaghe had more heart and a stronger will?

Both fighters could adapt. I'm not sure how we measure who was better at it? You tell me.

As was Johnny Tapia. Joe Calzaghe didn't beat Hopkins, Jones, or Lacy on the back foot? And he certainly had no reason to take backwards steps against the farmers and taxi drivers he was fighting before he started fighting in America.

 

Well i was watching a ton of boxing back then even more so than today(which is a lot),and i can tell you that although odds were close Romero was the slight favorite. I have to admit i picked Romero to win(although i went back and forth). Tapia had the bigger fan base in Alburquque but outside of New Mexico, more were picking Romero. I was fans of both but at the time i thought Danny was moving on to bigger things and would eventually be an ATG.

 

Tapia here. He was a very goodd fighter in his prime and would fight anybody.

 

Apparently you dont have enough of his fights on DVD. Of all your statements the one you stand by most strongly(Calzaghe having a better chin) is the most ridiculous one of all. I never even seen Johnny hurt in his prime much less but on his ass:nono Hell ive seen so much of Tapia i even saw his pro debut(he received a gift draw) against a good buddy of mine Efren Chavez.

 

Well Addie once kos Assasin in the rematch:bbb

Addie Ko 1 Assasin once again

 

thanks for the insight into the times my man :good

 

I think he was better at close and mid range, aswell as being a pretty decent stand up boxer on the outside..which of course is Kessler's bread and butter...Romero's edge in power gives him that extra edge in H2H matchups. MK has pretty good power but Ive never been all that sold on it.

Kessler was shown to have little in the way of versatility when physical and speed advantages were taken away from him. Maybe Romero didnt fight the kind of guys that would test this in his case but I thought he acquitted himself pretty well against Tapia.

Havent seen the Tapia fight for a while but I think its easier said than done to "change it up" against him. Given his cagey, instinctive style and the kind of chin thats very hard to dent with a shot that would change the fight dynamic.
Whilst Romero did get dominated in some of those late rounds, I felt after an early deficit he was doing pretty well in the midrounds..I think he somewhat frustrated Johnny with a spirited and fairly tight display in those rounds...Hope Im remebering the fight right though, it has been a while.

Not exactly sure but It wasnt just a cut I dont think...think there was some serious damage to his jaw or face. Which if the ref had missed the earlier elbow, would have possibly looked like Salazar was inflicting with his fists.

Can't disagree...I like what I see from Tapia better but for straight out effectiveness not much in it.

If Joe had a stronger will he would have willed himself to leave Warren and fight better opposition in their prime.

 

I disagree with anyone who thinks this is some bizarre question due to an obvious answer. This is a very fair question, I think. I vote Tapia. I can see how someone would vote Calzaghe though. He's an all-time great super middleweight. Tapia's an all-time great super flyweight. Anyone who knows Tapia from his low-level late-stage career only, has no business voting. The guy is 43, still fighting, and in the weight classes where people are supposed to burn out faster...and his drug use has been quite serious. Unlike Joe's supposed recreational dalliances (in retirement only?, as far as I've heard).


Let me know when Calzaghe keeps his 0 after winning a title in his third weight class and fighting into his forties and we'll talk about Tapia's few losses and late-stage career also. Both great fighters. I rate Tapia a bit higher.

 

Normally there is the same four Calslappy nutthuggers angrily scorning common sense in every thread.