Joe Calzaghe vs Prime Roy Jones jr, James Toney, Andre Ward

I’m denying having love for Eubank.

And bashing Joe?

If you want to call it that, you can.

However, at any time, feel free to try and refute the FACTS that I’ve given.

 

Can someone who voted for Joe explain how he beats a prime Jones? How does the fight play out? And please don't reference the fight where he fought a shot gun shy Jones with no reflexes. Prime Jones had amazing feet, plus was faster than Joe, more power, with skill, and timing to match. How does he beat him? Just smothers him with volume?

 

Nobody can explain it.


Joe had the opportunity to pursue a prime Roy Jones.

In real time, during his actual career.

I was there.

I lived through the era.


What Joe did, was FLIRT with the idea of it.

He loved talking about it.

Theoretically.


However, he did nothing in order for it to have been made a reality.


He would not raise his profile by going to America.

He would not move up to LHW.

He would not do anything to try and create an interest in America, or to move up the rankings into a potential mandatory position.


All he did, was flirt with the idea, in Britain, at SMW, behind his WBO safety net.


Every year, we have these threads. And every year, we have opinions on what Joe would have done etc.

But what most people don’t realise is, this could have happened for real, had Joe have really gone out for it.


The reason he didn’t, is because he didn’t have the confidence.

The will.


He was a great fighter.

Better than Tarver, Benn and Collins.

But he didn’t have the will that those guys had, and he wouldn’t push for it like how they did.


Now if anyone wants to contemplate the outcome of a prime for prime fight, they first need to take these 3 things onboard:

1. Again, Joe did not go all out to try and make it happen when he had the opportunity.

2. When they did fight, it was after Joe had already labelled him as being a shot fighter.

3. Twice since his retirement, Joe has said that he’s not sure if he could have beaten Roy in his prime.


So as well as hypothetically looking at how they may have matched up stylistically, people also need to look at Joe’s actions throughout the years, and the psychological aspect of things.

That is/was a huge factor.


IMHO, Joe could not in any way have been favoured over a prime Roy Jones. And especially as he didn’t fully believe that he could have beaten him.

 

Let’s for the sake of argument look at if they had have fought.


Joe had a huge amount of respect for him. Maybe not as a person, but for his ability.

He knew that Roy was just as fast, if not faster, with two handed power and far more accuracy.


Joe could never have just gone at him and unloaded huge volume.

Because Roy wouldn’t have been static and covered up with a high guard like in their fight.

Those actions would have resulted in a shootout.


The most realistic scenario, is that they’d have both respected each other a lot, and that they’d have gone feint for feint, in quite a cautious match up.


As for him clearing the 3?

Come on now.

Nobody predicting that can be taken seriously.


There’s no way that they can have seen his entire career.

 

RJJ was never rated in the top 10 again after his 2nd loss to Tarver.

And he never beat a top 10 rated fighter again after his 2nd loss to Tarver either.

Tarver, Johnson, had already convincingly beaten a past it RJJ 3 and 4 years prior to when Calzaghe beat him.

@Loudon is also correct Calzaghe did say in his own words years before facing RJJ that he would never fight him now because it wouldn't mean anything.

That's Calzaghe in his own words saying that.

Yet you've got some silly posts in here with people trying to make out Calzaghe beat a RJJ who was close to his peak absolute nonsense.

And no clearly Calzaghe wouldn't clear all 3.

I really don't think people know about Calzaghe's career.

He was a talented fighter but he spent most of his career defending the lowly regarded WBO belt in Wales against pretty mid opposition for the most part.

It speaks volumes that Calzaghe won a vacant title in 1997 but it took him until 2006 after beating Lacy. To finally start getting hype outside of the UK because he wasted alot of his career in uninspiring fights.

Could Calzaghe beat Ward ? Possibly but then Calzaghe did have alot of issues vs a 41 year old Hopkins who has similarities to Ward.

And Calzaghe has never fought a prime opponent anywhere near as good as Ward.

Toney did very well against elite southpaws he beat Jirov, Nunn, Johnson. Nunn especially in his prime is definitely on the same level as Calzaghe, I could see Toney's counter punching being difficult for Calzaghe plus he has experience vs good southpaws.

And lastly i certainly don't think Calzaghe beats RJJ we're talking the RJJ who outclassed Toney in 1994 not the past it RJJ who fought Calzaghe 14 years later.

 

I love Calzaghe, but this is telling it like it is.

Honestly I have to assume Calzaghe’s nearly mythical ranking nowadays has to be related to his being a western white guy. I can’t really think of another reason. He wasn’t super exciting, and anyone who was watching at the time knew what his resume was mostly built on. Most acknowledges his talent and that he was exceptional, but everyone also knew he never TRULY proved it against the best…

ATG fighter and arguably the greatest super middleweight ever - but there is simply no rational reason to say he clears the other 3 greatest fighters in his weight class.

 

Both were in their late 30s. Joe was past his best too, he retired after that fight, while Jones went on to fight for many years.

 

You don’t know anything.

Joe was 36.

Roy was about to turn 40.

Roy went on until he was 54.

However, he could only win at a very low level.

His last world level win had been in 2003.

If you’re going to respond, at least have the decency to apply some context.

 

Were you in love with Roy Jones? That would explain your obsessive hatred for Joe Calzaghe. Jones is heterosexual, so you never had a chance from the beginning to fulfil your fantasies.

Both Jones and Calzaghe were in their late 30s, ages 36 and 39. Both were past their best when the fight happened.

Joe absolutely schooled Jones, made him look very poor, similar to the way Jones had made lesser fighters look bad. Joe retired after the fight.

 

I thought that I was in love with Eubank Snr?

As for schooling him?

Throwing pitty pat shots against a static high guard?

It wasn’t prime Pea or Loma was it?

And how on earth can you defend the fight, when he wouldn’t fight him whilst he was great, and only after he knew that he was shot??

That was disgraceful, and it speaks volumes about who Joe is.

When Roy was at his best, Joe was fighting guys like McEntyre, Veit and Sobot, whilst telling people that he had to kill himself to make weight and that he had a fear of flying.

 

It’s absolutely hilarious that you’ve edited this, where you’ve changed it from Eubank to Roy.

Brilliant.

 

I didn't correctly remember the PM from several years ago.

Someone PMed me yesterday to correct me, that it was Roy Jones not Eubank you were in love with, and that's why you have the obsessive hatred for Calzaghe. That explains it even better - it must have been very painful for you to watch Joe dominate the man you dearly love.

 

Jones was getting absolutely destroyed by guys nowhere near the calibre of guys he beat previously like Danny Green. If that doesn't prove he was shot I don't know what wood.

Clearly Jones should have retired far earlier and made a horrible mistake in fighting so long

 

Yeah, because guys get shot at the same age right? Being past best and being shot are NOT close to the same. And deep down you know Louden isa correct. You call him hater the same way 13yo's call anyone a hater of their fave. Louden has at lease always produced back up to his claims on Joe C. Same with Dynamicpuncher in this thread. Your retort is "hater!!"

You post like a f'n child....

 

Someone messaged you yesterday to correct you?

Brilliant.

Well then why don’t you and this other guy come back to try and refute what I’ve said.

That’s what we’re here for.


No, I don’t hate Joe.

Hate is a strong word.


As I always say to you, show me where I’ve hated.

What constitutes as hate?

Criticism, with actual facts to back it, is not hate in my opinion.

So you tell me where I’ve hated.


Also, why don’t you challenge/criticise the other posters?

The ones who also share my views?