Fighters REAL records

im saying that a 50-0 moves to about 13 to 15 wins...its really hard to be so good that you win against good opposition early in your career and then maintain it for a long time

 

It's normal to fight regular opponents for new professionals, I mean they might be fighting guys that sound like they're supposed to lose but those guys are the ones in their leagues being new in the professional ranks.

Even in between fights or losses tune-ups or easy targets are very normal, more like warm-ups and stay active fights before bigger ones. The training camps these guys go through for major fights are INSANE and can't be gone through for every single fight, it eventually breaks the fighter down with all the pressure put on him and he ends up losing.

 

If you wanna say that look at Calzaghes current record

Right now he is 45-0

The fights that actually meant anything are:

Eubank
Lacy
Kessler
Hopkins

So does that make him 4-0 then?

All his other victories were either build ups to world title or meaningless defenses against nobodies in Wales

 

true in every sense of the word........hear that mayweather and calslappy fans?

 

So he is 7-0? Some can argue the Hopkins win and some may say Eubank was past his best rah rah rah we can say Calzaghe has between 5-7 good wins in his career

 

Agree with the last part not the first but... When you have unified dosnt mean youve beaten all the top opponents. You dont have to be the best to own a belt

 

Calzaghe held all the belts at 168.

 

After beating Lacy and Kessler. That we give him credit for, but what did he do before then?

 

Every fighter's record is padded with stiffs early in their career, almost without exception. So it's a wash, basically.

Now, when they're into the heart of their career's and still fighting guys with sub-.500 records, that's another matter.

 

Eubank was done and lost his next couple of fights. Lacy I wipe my ass with that one. Kessler who knowS how good this guy really is? He lost to BHOP, in reality Joe has yet to win a fight as far as Im CONCERNED

 

The Calzaghe bashing is unreal on this board. For 2 years I felt that Mikkel Kessler was the embodiment of the end of Joe's title reign. I couldn't even formulate a gameplan in my mind that would work in Joe's favor cuz Kessler had basically looked the part of a flawless fighter up until that point. I never even thought that the 2 guys would get in the ring together. What Calzaghe did that night was remarkable. He found a different gear (the older fighter who already fought like a whirlwind - imagine that) and upped the pressure on a guy who had never really felt any pressure. He took him out of his comfort zone and mixed in a tremendous body attack with his trademark flurries. Even had Kessler hurt (unfathomable to me at the time) before the referee intervened. What I'm trying to say is that I would never doubt Calzaghe again after that night. What Kessler accomplishes from this point on stands to be seen but I was firm in my opinion that he was Calzaghe's biggest threat at 168 and was quite vocal about the possibility of ducking being involved. Calzaghe answered all my questions in one night and did so by putting forth one of the best performances in UK boxing history. For that he is impervious to criticism, at least on my end. I was a critic for a long time cuz of the Salems and the Ashiras, etc. but Calzaghe went out and proved me wrong.