Calling all Calzaghe Haters

:happy :happy

 

This thread contradicts itself so much.

Hopkins is way past his best and not worthwhile, yet Calzaghe ducked the 'world class' Pavlik? Eh?!

Calzaghe ducked Dawson?? What?! Dawson was saying he wants to fight Tarver for ages, and only fought him a few weeks ago. Calzaghe had already said he was retiring months ago.

Glenn Johnson is questionable but if I didn't think I was in the right state of mind i'd prob do the same.

Pavlik was apparently offered a fight twice and turned it down both times. I'm sure someone will say that's not true because Pavliks said it wasn't, but that's hardly proof. Pavlik only mentioned Calzaghe when he was already in negotiations with RJJ in addition.

I don't understand the point of this thread though, or the mayweather ones. Is it not boring to continously day after day start a thread saying "Fighter A ducked these, everyone talk about it!"

 

Because Kessler hasn't fought anyone. People build Kessler up as some sort of great fighter. What did he really do???

I mean, I actually like Kessler. But, he's not a win for a HOFer to brag about. Kessler was an alphabet champ with a resume consisting of no big wins...

I do stick to facts.

The facts are that frankly, Calzaghe fans can't accept that his resume is weak, and always with qualifiers.

-Yeah, he beat Bernard Hopkins. But he beat a 43 year old Hopkins.
-He's fighting Roy Jones. But he's fighting a Roy Jones that looks NOTHING like the one that was the P4P King.
-He beat Kessler, but Kessler was 40-0 with no big wins.
-He beat Lacy, but Lacy was all bull**** hype, and any unbiased observer knows it.

As I said, every ATG I know of AT LEAST FOUGHT another ATG in or near his prime. Calzaghe has done nothing close to that.

And, Calzaghe's fans rarely speak about the period of his "prime" that consisted of 9 years of defending a useless belt to pad his record.

 

Maybe it would help if you knew a bit about boxing outside of the US.

 

Kessler being forgotten in 2 years is not a fact. It's highly subjective, and quite frankly ridiculous.

For a start he's likely to still be fighting barring a career ending injury.

 

Stalone: "America's boxing is in a re-building process - or a downward spiral ... right now there is noone even close to Calzaghe in the US" (by memory). It says it all - and he is right.

 

Ahhh, another anti-American bigot.

I know plenty about boxing outside of the US. Take the couple names that you'll undoubtedly name off of Kessler's resume, and what does he have?

Even the guys like Andrade and Beyer are not anything that are so great. Fighters like RJJ, Hopkins, and Toney have a dozen guys of that caliber on their resumes.

Kessler has fought 42 times. He has really very little to show for it... He seems to be a good fighter, but he's not the type of win that Calzaghe should be bragging about at his HOF-acceptance speech.

While RJJ is talking about winning titles in 4 divisions, beating BHop and Toney when they were young and near their primes, winning countless belts and beating a dozen world champions, you know what Calzaghe will be doing?

Talking about Kessler, Lacy, 43 year old Hopkins, a Roy Jones who is a shell of his former self, and Eubank...

I have nothing against Europeans, European fighters, Calzaghe, Kessler, or anyone else. And I'm not a stupid super patriotic American who just roots for fighters because they're American.

The fact is, Calzaghe's resume is thin for the type of credit he gets on this site.

 

Sorry, that's a technical mistake calling it a fact.

The FACT is, Calzaghe's resume is slim, his nuthuggers have the some argument constantly, and it's completely unsubstantiated.

I named the ONLY names Calzaghe has to the credit, and why the wins aren't all they're cracked up to be.

I won't deny Calzaghe's talent. But he took the easy way out almost everytime he had to make a decision in his career...

 

I am not anti-US at all, i just find it very strange that someone who claims to be a boxing fan would place the Lacy win in Calzaghe's 3 biggest wins but not the Kessler win. If you think that Kessler's record is thin - and i agree that for 40-odd fights there isn't much quality on there - then what does that make Lacy's record? Kessler unified against a long(ish) reigning Beyer and has comfortably beaten Mundine who has been around the top of 168 for years. Add to that the likes of Andrade and Lucas - plus the fact that Kessler has gone on to immediately win another title belt - and you have a far, far superior record to Lacy's. And yet you credit Lacy as a big name and not Kessler, the only basis for which can be that Lacy is American and Kessler is not.

 

Hopkins looked pretty prime vs. Pavlik

 

I honestly just forgot to put Kessler on there. He is a big win for Calzaghe, which shows how thin Calzaghe's resume is.

Lacy was a big win, because he had big American hype. Every fighter in the US that can hit hard and looks like a tank is called "The Next Mike Tyson". It's really starting to **** me off...

Regardless, I am both a Calzaghe and Kessler fan. I like them as fighters. However, I look at other great fighters (in various weightclasses) with 40 or 50 fights, and I'd be hardpressed to find a softer resume than Calzaghe's...

 

It doesn't mean your take on it is correct. You spin everything negatively, we can do it just as easily the other way and its more accurate.

Firstly he has a Eubank, who might have been old, but Calzaghe was young. That's a tough fight for a 20 fight novice that fought nobody yet.

Then he has Reid who was a solid B+ level champion, got robbed by Ottke.

Lacy who was widely tipped to beat him. Say what you want about him, Lacy was a favorite particularly in America. Calzaghe took what looked like a big risk when he was considered to be slipping.

Then Kessler, undefeated unified champion. Beat 3 or 4 top 10 ranked contenders, barely dropping a round. Calzaghe only just a favourite here, again a big risk.

Hopkins. Nobody is claiming he's at his peak, but he's a top 10 fighter. A clear top 5 fighter infact. End of story.

That is a good top set of wins, with a few solid ones below that.

 

Regardless of the "freak" issue with Hopkins, it's impossible for him to be near prime at 43.

He hasn't looked that good for years...

Also, let's face it. Pavlik looked TERRIBLE, and his style is tailor-made for Hopkins.

I love Hopkins as a fighter (when he fights like he did against Pavlik, not when he just hugs and is dirty), but he is not what he once was.

 

But HOF-level fighters fight other HOF-level fighters...On your list, you have one in Hopkins, who was 43 at the time.

I'm not saying their not GOOD wins. But when Reid, Kessler, and Lacy are making your top 5 wins list and you have 45 fights and 23 title defenses, something is wrong...

Do you really believe that Calzaghe's resume is comprable to other HOF-caliber fighters with similar longevity in boxing???

 

I don't disagree, but then 168 has been a weak division for a long time. I can't think of many fighters at 168 that he could have fought who would have massively improved his record (aside from Ottke). He should have stepped up to 175 to try and force a fight with RJJ a lot sooner, but then 175 was a pretty **** poor division as well (RJJ's record at 175 is hardly a who's who of boxing superstars, his biggest names are at the lower weights) so aside from RJJ there weren't many there who would have massively improved his record. He could never have boiled down to 160 and enticing people up from there, especially B-Hop who was also in his comfort zone defending against mandatories for many years, is not easy when you don't have PPV financial backing. I think he certainly could have shown more ambition and unified the titles a lot sooner, then moved up to fight RJJ when he was somewhere near his prime, but the fact is his record is only missing a couple of names that it realistically could have on it, and he is fighting one of those guys next week.