Calzaghe, Resume in perspective

I'm gonna go agaisnt the trend here and say his resume is actually very good. Let's break it down:
1. World champion for 11 years
2. 21 title defenses
3. Unified SMW division
4. Defeated 8 former world champions (i can't name them all but, Eubank, Mitchell, Brewer, Hopkins, Reid, Woodhall)
5. Ranked no.1 in two Different divisions

And can we stop banging on about A) Calzaghe, and B) Hopkins age when they fought, Joe was 36, and Hopkins was ranked 3 P4P, and no.1 at LHW, therefore his age is irrelevant

 

Points 1,2,3,5 and your last paragraph have nothing to do with resume.

And your point 4 doesn't scratch the surface of that resume. Click on the link I posted on this thread for a very thorough and factually accurate breakdown of his entire world championship resume.

 

Another dis on a great fighter. He is still 45 and 0 and still counting. Same thing can be said for roy, and never getting in the ring earlier in their careers. Not their fault. Management. Still bettter now, then never.

 

Convenient considering the fact that Eubank gave Carl Thompson fits the very next year 22 pounds above his weight class.

 

A definition of resume:

1. A brief account of one's professional or work experience and qualifications, often submitted with an employment application.
2. A summary: a resumé of the facts of the case.

I feel my points describe his professional experience well enough

 

What was Hopkins P4P rank when he fought Calzaghe? Somewhere around 3-5 if I remember correctly.

 

Calzaghe isn't applying for a job as a secretary.

Resume = fights/names in boxing terms.

 

I'd give him a B- grade on the overall resume. Its by far above average, but he has only really started chalking up B+ and A grade wins in his last 5 fights. Now, he takes on an opponent where the best grade I could give him would be a B win. He needs to use what time he has left to chase the A-grade victories. Pavlik would be a great win. So would Dawson. Close his career with these two victories, and the man is an ATG, solid.

 

So, what's your point? Hatton took on the p4p#3 in his first world title challenge. He later chased the world p4p#1, had to go up a weight division to get the fight. You bringing up a fight with a 43-year-old man doesn't change those facts.

 

Of course I am. When evaluating a resume you look at the names and evaluate the opponents and the performances. That's how it's done.

 

I'm glad we can all agree that Calslappy was scared of "Das Phantom".

 

Not convenient at all, just cold hard facts. Check them up if you don't believe me.

Eubank was so brave v Thompson, showed all the heart we knew he had, that's why it was so sad to see him beaten twice purely due to Eubank being smaller and well past his prime, by a fighter not good enough to lace his boots. Thompson's heart and toughness gave him some great wins, but he was never a top quality fighter IMO.

 

Of course I'm not. But when you're asked to look at resume, you look at resume. If you want to discuss achievements, start that thread, or start one about his career or his legacy. Don't complain about keeping the discussion to resume when it's called 'Resume'.