Do you think Calzaghe's legacy will improve or decline over time?

Don't be absurd

Witter was handed his belt on a plate, and pulled off one good performance against Harris (who was no great shakes anyway). It's hard to honestly say Junior EVER beat a top five contender.

Hatton beat Tszyu to claim a title and then won multiple belts against top contenders, even one at a higher weight.



Joe will be looked on more kindly over time.

The detail that Jeff lays out now will, on the whole, be forgotten. The bullet points will read : unbeaten, beat two top unbeaten contenders who were supposed to dethrone him, and went to the states for mega fights to beat Hopkins and Jones. Particularly Hopkins who is still in p4p lists a year or so later...

Not saying such a simple synopsis tells the full story, but that's what people will learn about him in future years

 

Benn, Eubank and Collins would disagree with you Jeff. I know for a fact Benn admits Calzaghe would have been too good for him.

He would have beaten them all with Eubank being the toughest one but still coming through on points. Collins was made for him it would have been a landslide points victory that one.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Absurd generally means without rationale...Do you think Hatton would have beaten Zab Judah in his 17th professional fight?

 

Zab back then was a monster and nobody would could have hung with him.

 

Benns been humble, as a retired former fighter. He would have KO'd Calzaghe.

 

Not sure if Benn would've beaten Calzaghe, who is very good at adapting and has shown a decent set of whiskers.

Prime Jones woul've starched him.

 

Brian Nielson was 49-0 and had wins over Tim Witherspoon and Larry Holmes. His only losses were to Mike Tyson and Dicky Ryan in an upset.

No one gives a ****.

 

Fleaman. You are a hero. But who did Calzaghe show decent whiskers against?

 

I feel as though (rightly or wrongly) Rocky Marciano's 49-0 is still rated because he beat men who have also secured legacies of their own - elite ATG Ezzard Charles, elite ATG Archie Moore, highly rated heavyweight champion Jersey Joe Walcott (I wouldn't mention Joe Louis for Rocky the same as I wouldn't mention Roy Jones for Joe, beating the fossilized remains of a once-great fighter is perhaps not held against the victor, but it is never remembered fondly or rated highly at all).

When the dust has settled and the particulars of a career dim and diminish in time, all that's left (or the most significant things that are left) are the names on the record. That's why Rocky Marciano's 49-0 is still remembered and rated far more highly than Ricardo Lopez's 52-fight unbeaten career, because Marciano fought great names and Lopez didn't.

Where will Joe come? I'd say somewhere in the middle. He doesn't have a Charles or a Moore, but he does have a narrow win over a past-prime Hopkins. Still, the history books will show a win there.

He doesn't have a Walcott, but the Kessler win may appreciate in value if he wins the Super Six.

After that though, there's really not much. The Lacy win has undoubtedly declined in value since the manner of it shocked many, as Lacy has been exposed as a hype job in all of his subsequent performances (and, crucially, in some of his pre-Calzaghe performances to the knowledgable fan, re: Lacy-Sheika compared to Calzaghe-Sheika). Eubank had already been beaten well twice by Collins and disappeared off the radar for a while, and there's nothing else will jump out at future generations.

I'd say if Kessler wins the Super Six, Calzaghe's resume does get a shot in the arm. It would prove to many who believed Kessler was basic and unproven when he fought Joe that he did have great ability.

If Kessler doesn't win, Calzaghe will always be remembered and rated because a 46-0 record is an uncommon achievement. But I tend to think he will be grouped more with Ricardo Lopez for a zero built on relatively weak opposition, than someone who genuinely took on all comers in his era and really proved to be a dominant elite fighter. And if the names don't mean anything as time goes on, the value of the record does inevitably decline (as, rightly or wrongly, Marciano's will not).

A lot hinges on Kessler. :good

 

Fair point. I'd never argue against any light-heavy puncher stopping him in the first as it's been shown he could be caught early there.......but in the sense that he was rarely hurt throughout his career and showed good recovery to get up from Jones (admittedly a scuffing punch) I'd say he was able-chinned (if that makes sense)

No Andrade-esque chin but he didn't need it.

 

Lopez fought EVERYBODY in and around his division. He was far superior to Calzaghe in every possible way. Calzaghe's career is irrelevant compared to those two greats.

 

Michael Carbajal. Humberto Gonzalez.

Easily the two biggest names of Lopez's era in the division above him, and he never fought either of them.

Argument over. Calzaghe's resume is better.

 

If we're talking about Ricardo Lopez, I must say not moving up to fight Carbajal and Chiquita is pretty glaring. Still, better career than Calzaghe and showed better skills IMO

 

Unsure about a monster but a very good fighter...i believe most would say Hatton would have lost that fight.

Now what about Hatton fighting the likes of T. Bradley and D. Alexander when he is 34 or 35? Does anyone actually think that Hatton could beat this level of opponent at this age?

Or fight this level of oponenet in his 36th,37th or 38th bout and without doubt have a win on his record?

For me an objective comaparsion at this point-

Hatton - Witter (in theory)
k. tszyu WIN Lost
Muassa WIN WIN
Collazo win (LOST in truth) WIN
Urango WIN WIN
Castillo WIN WIN
Mayweather LOST LOST
Lazcano WIN WIN
Malingaggi WIN WIN
Pacaman LOST LOST

Does anyone seriously believe had Witter not fought these fighters at the same exact time that Hatton fought them and at the very point in his own carrer (witter) that hatton did.....that he would not have had similar results?

Im not a fan of either fighter or have a dislike as i respect both for having succesful carrers. Hatton had a more commerically succesful carrer along with more oportunities to showcase his abilty compared to Witter hence he was more succesful BUT Hatton is the same level as a witter.

The only fight that Hatton took that i believe Witter would not have done aswell in is the first title fight that Hatton had when he took on K. Tszyu...but then i believe that Witter would have outpointed Collazo a fight i believe Hatton lost to.