If Joe Calzaghe had lost a fight, would you still consider him an ATG?

Calzaghe is definate hall of famer, Calzaghe deserves to be incluced ahead of Sylvester Stallone and Joe Cortez.

He held the 4 titles at SMW, that alone is enough for him to be considered a HOF.

But because the SMW division was weak, and he only had 2 fights at LHW, I dont think he did enough to reach the status of an ATG. And to be honest I dont think his skills were that great either, except his work rate that is something no one can deny, whether he slapped or had fantasies humping men in the ring, the man had phenominal work rate/stamina.

 

This is accurate.

 

Calzaghe would have boxed circles around Froch. From round 3 on, he completely outboxed Hopkins. The super 6 was in the context of his having left the division, after unifying WBC (or was it IBF?) and WBA titles (being stripped afterwards means nothing). His being gone made it a great time to find the next "undisputed" champ (forgetting about Bute of course!).

 

Do they really ?? :-(

 

I don't think the US fans would have let him get away with it for so long.
Pavlik took **** for lining up weak opposition for 3 or 4 fights. 9 Years? no way.

Agreed.

 

How can you say it was weak opposition for 9 years? Every long reigning champ with many defences has gimmes, but all have world class opposition in their resumes also.
Calzaghe has many world class fighters on his resume. Part of the problem that you have is that America doesnt know alot of them, but that doesnt make it weak opposition. Veit & Mkertchyan were solid world class SMWs.
Consider Hopkins resume for his long reign, there is many weak gimmes in it. R Allen 3 times, Hakkar, S Frank, J Lipsey etc.
If Calzaghe was based in America his fights with other American SMWs would have been considered bigger fights and wins due to recognition and hype, fights against Sheika, Brewer, Manfredo, Mitchell and Lacy wouldnt be considered weak opposition due to being built into events. All those fighters were top 10 fighters or world rated when Calzaghe beat them

 

Came here to see why this thread has over a hundred post...

SHould have known...Calzaghe = fanboy

Still, while i'm here i may at least answer the question.

I don't know anything about ATG. I leave that to you experts.

But what i know is, no matter where you experts rank the guy, he was a damn good fighter.

 

Took Calzaghe just under 8 1/2 years(pathetically long time) to unify with Lacy. While it took Hopkins 6 years(also too long) to fight Holmes for the WBC. Not remotely near double.

Hopkins' CV doesn't need embelishing to prove it's superior to Calzaghe's, so let's stick to facts.

 

Shut the **** up Noob! I ought to cut your ass! ******!

 

I disagree. He didn't just have a few gimmes, he had a lot of them, and for a long period of time. Not counting Lacy, because, to me that was the beginning of his ascent into the elite of the sport. There isn't too much to quibble with after that, Manfredo and Jones not withstanding. But before that he hadn't unified, and seemed to be satisfied taking on wbo challengers, which was hardly considered to be the greatest of challenges.

I disagree about Veit and Mrk. and the other guys represent the top of the litter when it comes to those 9 years. Just not what I would expect out of a fighter of JC's calibre or a guy looking to be an atg.

The ring annual rankings, to be taken for what ever worth, are at least a barometer of some of the the top 10 of the division at year's end. They might not be a perfect record, or even close, but they do include both American and non American alike. For JC to have fought only 5 or 6 out of his 20+ defenses is puzzling to say the least, no?

 

Same could be said about the euros.

So where do we go from here.

 

he was a good fighter but not an ATG

 

All pro fighters deserve respect and I won't call any of them bums and all that. But I'm sorry, most of these guys are the types a top level fighter fights on his way up the ladder as experience builders. Not a steady string of championship defenses.

Ashira
Thornberry
Salem
Jimenez
Fereyra
Mrketchyan
Sobot
Mcintyre

......... are straight up gimmes.(Pudwill not included because he was a replacement)

That's 8 out of 16 fights(not counting Pudwill again) between winning the title against Eubank and unifying with Lacy.

Starie
Sheika
Veit(x2)

.....are better, but not the building blocks of a resume, which they are here.

That leaves......

Reid .....an ok fighter, who put in a good performance vs JC. Lost more often than not when stepping up though.

Brewer ...... to put it nicely, had certainly seen better days and lost a bunch toward the end, which JC was right in the middle of. Never a world beater.

Mitchell...... an pretty good fighter, JC deserves credit for the manner of the win over a former belt holder.

Woodhall..... a decent fighter who had a couple of pretty good wins. A middle of the pack type.


All in all, at most there are a handful of B level guys amongst them.

It was ascent inot the elite, which is where his skills should have taken him sooner. Lacy and the hype has been gone over ad nauseum, but it was a good win IMO and in unifying, it showed he wasn't merely a regional champ beckoning to those who would come and fight him at home, even if it was a home fight. He took on the "fearsome" challenger and kicked his ass. It served as notice that there was a guy willing to step up and be ''the man''.

Manfredo was what he was. A tough guy who probably didn't belong in the same ring as Calzaghe. Not a knock on Manfredo, but that was no challenge.

Ottke only held the IBF for most of his reign if memory serves. There were other belts and other champs. Mitchell held the belt long before he fought Calzaghe, why not fight him then? Just an example, my friend.

Joe has been known to back out of a fight or 3 himself. It happens for whatever reason, some which are never figured out.

only by the wbo as far as I know. I'm always willing to learn new things though.

Showing a fighter's prowess against other guys who also have weak resumes doesn't stand to prove that a guy was a top fighter. Nor does playing 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon to show he challenged or shared the ring with a quality fighter. Regional belts or championships don't mean much either. In regards to Braehmer, who did he ever beat that was ever a top fighter? ANd what is he doing with his wbo belt? Holding it hostage in Germany. Not a good example IMO.

Nope its not. But again, lots of reasons fights don't happen. But Hopkins gets no benefit of the doubt from me. As for the rest, I am not privy to the internal dealings of any fights. I don't know who was or wasn't willing to fight who for whatever their reasons were, his or theirs. I just know there are a lot more names amongst the upper echelon of available fighters that he did not fight as opposed to who he did.

I find Ring rankings to be much more fair and accurate than the alphabet belt rankings(self interests). They require no sanctioning fees nor any hanky panky. They may be biased to some degree, but I think we can both agree that they are clearly far less biased than the wba/wbc/ibf/wbo rankings.