Is Joe Calzaghe a Master Boxer?

has too many technical deficiencies to be considered a master boxer but he has a tremendous will to win and always exerts his will on an opponent

 

Booradley is correct. Calzaghe is an enigma. He is a master in his own way.

Doesn't always look like textbook technique but every opponent ends up looking like a rabbit in the headlights in their corner against this man.

 

joe calzaghe has many attributes to label him a master boxer/technician:
lighning handspeed
great footwork
stamina/workrate
ability to adapt style in a fight (kessler fight is prime example of this)
solid defence (people may argue this but to not have a mark on your face after 45 fights suggests to me he has a good defence)
and last but not least a big heart and incredible will

 

There speaks another bitter Yank.

 

Yes, but I wouldn't put him up with the top10 or 20 'master boxers'. He's not perfect. But just watch the Kessler fight real close. Watch how he adapts to different situtations, changes pace, comes forward, fights backward, neutralize the opponents' key weapons (uppercut, jab, combinations), it's truly unique. You can see him box, fight behind the quick short jab, brawl, everything. He's not a master like Whitaker because he has holes in his defense, but his offense is masterful and he uses it as defense most of the time (not without getting hit).


His resume could be much better, I agree, but one thing is vastly underrated here: is his ability to adapt to any situation and turn the opponents' advantage to disadvantage. You have to watch 10 fights of his of course to see whole Calzaghe style in work (and the weaknesses) or at least 5 to see how many ways he can fight. I suggest the Sheika, the Bika, the 2nd Veit, the Lacy, the Kessler and the Hopkins fights. Very different styles and Joe was still on top (or down).

In the Hopkins fight you should watch Bernard's best weapons, the sneaky off-balance shots and the awkward right hands on the inside taken away from him. Bernard Hopkins still landed those quality, masterful shots late vs. Tarver and Winky, but he never was in the fight in the second half vs. Calzaghe. Stamina issues? No, just Calzaghe's stamina is THAT better and Hopkins couldn't find the opening anymore and had to do something to break the rythm with fouling and faking. Where were those shots he couldn't stop landing vs. Oscar, Tito, Tarver, Winky? Kesser really forgot to use the great uppercuts and combinations? No. Kessler himself said no matter what he did, Calzaghe always had the answer and took away everything. Now that's what I call masterful boxing.

 

I dont think so but only because of the slapping as much as I dont like Joe C I would be the first to admit he has great speed heart and conditioning. I think the B h op fight made him look a bit basic which he is not but you do have to use that as a comparison as hopkins is a master of the school.

 

On Calzaghe's stamina: Roy answered in the Bunce show to the question whether Joe will be one of the busiest fighters he has ever fought:

No! He IS the busiest fighter I've ever fought and that will cause major problems.

 

He is better boxer than Pac, but he is not unique in terms of classical skills. Kessler showed that he has better classical skills for example. Hits more correctly with closed gloves and much more schooled straight punches, uppercuts, hooks etc.

However, Joe is very fast, has a lot of stamina and is very unortodox. His pitter-patter is actually very effective because noone else really uses it. It i like being southpaw - if you are the only southpaw then you have an advantage and you can beat better people because you are more prepared for their style than they are for yours. Noone is really prepared for Joe's style, while he is well-prepared for most other styles (because many have slighter varieties or those styles).

Joe in a nutshell.

 

sums it up for me a rare type of fighter a clever busy southpaw hard to fight for sure but not a master boxer

 

edit

 

i like him but....

Hell No

 

Calzaghe is in a class of his own. He still looks invincible to me. Of course he has mastered boxing. When gets knocked down, he stands up in a second. You don't see that too often.

 

what would pavlik be without his power and body size?

what would hopkins be without his defensive skills and sneaky little tricks?

what would tyson have been without his attitude and physical gifts?

each fighter is made up of different stuff and excels in different areas, be they physical, technical or mental. without one of their famed assests the elite fighters would not be so elite. joe is a guy with great physical ability, will to win and a never say die attitude.

frankly your post was ****ing stupid, taking away a guys best attributes and then questioning how good he really is.

 

Not a pure boxer, but definitely a master technician. One of the very best of all time in that regard.

 

Absolutely not. Has some advanced boxing technique however. This technique, though, has highly apparent limitations depending on who he's in with, thus this concept that "Joe doesn't look good sometimes." That's because his prerehearsed set of moves doesn't always happen to fit the style of opponent he may be facing on the given night. Depending on the details, Joe Calzaghe can appear to be one of the best, or worst, boxers in all the sport. It just depends, again, on who he's facing and how diversified and skilled this opponent happens to be himself.