Marciano: Jersey Joe Walcott- Heavyweight Champion of the world, and # 1 Contender in rematch Ezzard Charles- # 1 rated heavyweight contender in both fights Joe Louis- # 2 rated heavyweight contender Archie Moore- Lightheavyweight champion and # 1 heavyweight contender Calzaghe: Bernard Hopkins- lightheavyweight champion Roy Jones- Unranked So essentially hopkins is the only old great Calzaghe beat who was still an elite contender/champion. Marciano beat FOUR of them including 2 in rematches. He also dominated his old greats far more than Calzaghe did to Hopkins. That is why Calzaghes resume doesn't compare to Marciano's.
The reid match should have been his first loss. Reid outlanded joe plus his shots were much cleaner and affective. To be fair joe broke his hand but still that is a match he shouldn't have won. As for fighting the best of his era, he didn't. He never fought ottke nor beyer. The only time he fought the top ranked opponent was when he beat kessler.
All of the all-time great made there bones against the older guys but sometimes the older guy were too tough as in the case of Sharkey -Dempsey, - Peter-Vitali, Charles-Walcott- , Hopkins Pascal, but for the most part from Corbett to Jeffries from Dempsey-Willard to Louis and the ex-champ parade...to Ali, Holmes,Tyson they were fighting older men... some of the older guys improved with age such as 37 yrs old Walcott, even Floyd Patterson in the 70's gave the younger Quarry,Bonavena,Ellis,and Ali a decent fight. As far as Marciano, most of his # 1 contenders which he defended against in 5 of 6 defenses (unheard of) had already beaten the Younger bigger guys to get the # 1 spot. Remember there were no split titles or ABC alphabet Boxing ORGS. only the lineal title. What if Pascal, Pavlik, refused to fight Hopkins because he was in his 40's or because he was the best and the oldest not the youngest.
Well more people thought Joe won the lost against Reid, have you actually seen it as it was a bit before your time? As for not facing the best of his era, Reid, Brewer and Mitchell all had decent cases for wins over Ottke. Ottke also turned the Calzaghe fight down. Beyer wasn't really that good. Kessler was better than Ottke and Beyer. Obviously Hopkins was the best of his era, Jones Jr too, both fights happened way too late but Hopkins was offered the money he asked for to fight Joe in 2003 and then doubled his demand. Jermaine Taylor also turned down 4-5million to goto Wales. Some fighters were screaming for a Calzghe fight like Pavlik, Mundine, Green and Calzaghe pulled out of a Glen Johnson fight 2-3times claiming he was injured, although he was also going through a sticky divorce, which imo was part of the reason but Joe was a bit aprehensive at times of fighting the best even though when he fought better fighters he usually did well Largely unknown fact - Calzaghe wanted to pull out of the Lacy fight but his dad made him go through with it
Was 2-2 in his previous 4 fights. 6-5 in his previous 11. Awesome. Used-up old timer. A natural lightheavy on a major downslide who also lost 2 of his previous 4. Should have changed his name he was such a ghost of his former self. A sad, sad affair that shouldn't even be discussed. Another lightheavy rising the ranks in a horrible heavyweight division. How much more damning could it be that the top heavies were light-heavies? How would we rank a middleweight division which was dominated by natural 135 pounders? Now which of these great contenders/champs was in his prime form? Do let me know.
En contraire it was right in my time what's your scorecard for this fight? What's your scorecard for reid/brewer/mitchel v ottke? I never claimed otherwise about ottke turning it down. For a few years the top 3 contenders at the weight were joe, beyer and ottke. Beyer would lose to kessler eventually and joe fought him in his last fight at the weight for the lineal championship. Hopkins was a top quality win, no doubt. He's the greatest smw of all time but that's more to do with the division than anything else.
The Gibbons Dempsey beat is better than anyone Calzaghe even faced. But overall you are right, Calzaghe´s resume is better than Dempsey´s. Slightly though. And Calzaghe is numero uno in his division while Dempsey is quite a bit away from that position in his. What is this sh*t with calling proven hw contenders "(natural) lightheavyweights"? Charles and Moore had more hw fights than Bower or Lewis ffs, just because they fought at least as much in lower divisions doesn´t mean they were great hws. Just because a fighter moved up doesn´t mean he doesn´t belong into the division he moved up to. Sorry.
you all excuse trampie. he is a chronic nuthugger who spends most of his time on the general forums where people are dumb enough to believe calzaghe is the G.O.A.T. don't mind his intrusion. it's good to see that the people in the classic forums aren't that stupid. calzaghe is far from an ATG anything.
exactly! like his best win isn't controversial and like all but two of his knocks were legit stoppages. this says it all about calzaghe's "legacy" [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACgTJhEdj5M[/ame] not only did he fight bums, but most of them were middleweights who were too lazy to watch their diet.
This **** is the fact the true heavyweight division was so lacking that it was overrun by lightheavies. What if the middleweights of any given era were dominated (not one guy coming up in weight but dominated) by 135 pounders? How would you rate that era of the middleweight division. Marciano was a great, great fighter, but he fought in an era lacking great big men, when old ass light heavies were as competitive as the 200+ pounders. This simply is not the case in the more successful or even mediocre eras. It is a telling reality.
Do you live on this planet? If so, you would know there was serious and legitimate controversy about both the Hopkins and Reid fights.