Maybe it's my age but I kinda long for the days when British fighters won a belt and defended for as long as they could. I know boxers fought regularly in those days but a long reigned champion got more recognition from the public at large. People like Hatton, Calzaghe and Naz to a certain extent became very famous despite being on Sky because of their victorious longevity. This was also true of guys like Jim Watt, Steve Robinson and Eubank though they were also terrestrial TV regulars. It was nice having a run of world title contests on TV . What is the point of Josh Kelly going to America to lose to Ennis, its real short termism. Boxers always think they are going to win but post defeat they are pretty much finished. Its like CBS and Opetaia, CBS has built himself back up only to go back down again in one fight. Callum Smith isn't going to beat Bivol but could have had an exciting run as a champion and really benefitted boxing in Liverpool. We don't have many world champions, don't throw those hard won belts away at the first, all be it, lucrative, opportunity.
Problem is, prize money and purses are so top-heavy now that unless you're genuinely elite, you'd probably be better off in a different field, at least financially. Especially boxing, because you pay a physical price like no other. You don't grow old and improve in this game, you just take more damage. So if that life-changing opportunity comes, boxing is one place where I'd say sell your soul, get as much as you can and **** the belts. What needs changing is how the sport is funded, and how those funds are distributed, because the current model leaves most fighters chasing one big payday before the game chews them up. That said, winning a Lonsdale belt and going the traditional route towards a world title is still probably the best way to actually build a proper career. But less than 1% are making Brewster's in boxing. It's not football, where an average Premier League player can end up set for life. Boxing is probably the hardest game in the world to make it in, and the most dangerous. You're basically playing Russian roulette, and most people only ever see the survivors at the top.
Nobody wants to see fighters hanging on to their belts longer than they need to simply by padding their record against opponents who aren’t at their level. That’s what makes the reigns of Hatton and Calzaghe stand out so clearly in hindsight. They held onto their belts by consistently taking on, and beating, very dangerous, high-calibre boxers, not by dodging them.
To be fair Calzaghe defended it against mostly shyte for 8 years. He had the WBO for 9 years before fighting for another belt.
Fair enough. Defending a 1990s WBO belt against part-time supply teachers and regional nightclub bouncers for a decade is a gruelling task! The sheer mental fortitude required to get out of bed to fight Kabary Salem or Tocker Pudwill on a wet Saturday in Cardiff should be commended. But seriously, while the middle of his reign had more filler than a cheap sausage, nobody can deny he absolutely cleared out the division when the big names finally stopped avoiding him.
Calzaghe and Hatton were different gravy coming through. More so than Froch really, who wasn't actually that impressive until he won the belt and went on that run, mainly off the back of the Super Six and everything that came with it. Josh Taylor is probably the closest in recent times, but then look how short that window was once he started taking the really hard fights and his body began breaking down at the end. It's a fine balance really, and Warren seemed to have a formula for building fighters back then. He didn't rush them through the way Fast-Car often does now. And not to sound morbid, but even Hatton, one of the real success stories of the sport over here, had CTE showing on the post-mortem.
Plus the WBO wasn't a recognised title back then, it was on par with something like the IBO now. So it's always a stretch when people claim Calzaghe was a long reigning world champion.
In the case of Josh Taylor, moving to London ended his career. Had he stayed in Scotland and working with the same people I really believe he'd have retired unbeaten. Even Crawford had a hell of a lot of respect for him as a potential opponent.
London is one of them places mate. Unless you’re from there, it’s an adjustment, and not a good place to get distracted in either. Back in the day it ruined many a Scottish footballer, Charlie Nicholas and McAvennie being the obvious ones. Depends on the person though. Some lads thrive off it, others lose the structure and discipline that got them there in the first place, and it’s an easy place to attract parasites. Also feel being stuck in London didn’t help Darren Sutherland either, but agree, Josh v Crawford was on the cards at one point and it wasn’t a gimme for Terence either.
Another way of looking at it is Calzaghe’s fear of flying that was supposedly a big obstacle suddenly disappeared when Jones and Hopkins were way past it.
He lived in London under McGuigan. What ruined him was moving to trainers who tried to change his style. Even in the Ramirez fight he was boxing on the back foot as per Davison’s instructions & couldn’t get a foothold then just reverted to type and took over.
Belts have so little intrinsic value these days that winning and defending one means less than it has at any other point in boxing history. It's got to the point that winning a "world" title is potentially leverage to get "big" fights and money, rather than it being an end in itself. That didn't happen overnight; we went through the two-belt era in the 70s, through to the addition of the IBF and then later the WBO, and you could still kind of get away with calling yourself "world champion" despite there being three other guys claiming the same thing in your division. Once you started throwing super, diamond, regular, interim and whatever other bollocks into the mix, the elastic well and truly snapped. So no one really cares what letters and belt you're carrying around your waist, and for how long. It's about who you beat and how. Throw in that it's harder to build a profile by conventional means without mainstream TV, and it just isn't a commercially viable business model to sit on a belt and rack up defences in the same way. It's a while since a British fighter had a lengthy reign as a world champion, but what is the incentive? For example, Liam Smith's domestic fights with Eubank were probably more lucrative than Callum's world title reign (bar Canelo). The fight with Canelo for Callum obviously dwarfed any his successful title defences combined. If you win a belt, you get leverage for big fights, and you try to make the most of that.
Calzaghe’s biggest fear was himself. Forget which book it was, either his own or Warren’s, but Brick-Top basically had to talk him off the ledge going into the Lacy fight because Joe was ready to pull out. The hand injuries hindered him as well, but say what you want about Hopkins and Jones, Bernard beat Pavlik in his next fight and took Pascal to school later on. And Joe humiliated Roy more than he would have done if he’d blasted him out in a round. I don’t think anyone knows how good Calzaghe actually was, because every time he went into deep water, he stepped up. Only real question mark for me is the Robin Reid fight. Beyond that, Byron Mitchell had him down and hurt, but Calzaghe went and walked right through him in the same round.
