Who's a better all round fighter, Pacquao or Calzaghe?

Calzaghe is a joke. Calzaghe makes Mayweather's claim to be an ATG seem almost legit.

 

As a fan of both (and a longer term fan of Calzaghe), I would have to say that Pac is a somewhat better allround fighter than Calzaghe.


If we rank them on greatness (achievements, level of competition etc), then that gap widens quite a bit.

 

Are u taking the **** - calzaghe doesn't even deserve to be in the same sport as pacquiao...

 

Calzaghe.

 

Joe's a better boxer.....Put PAC is a better fighter. both are good overall but technical form goes to Joe..dynamics of a fighter goes to PAC.

 

All round, Calzaghe.

To many pac nuthuggers on these forums.

 

:rofl

Joe is like this era's "GWH" - on ESB anyway .. as he's a complete nobody to US sport fans .. but the squawking/bleating defense around here of a merely good fighter and desire to put him on a pedestal is f**king embarrassing. Hard to find any other reason for this absurd hype of such a fighter.

So many clowns .... and obviously **** athletes if they can't see the difference.

Might as well compare Pac's fighting and athletic capability to Micky Ward .. would make about as much sense as Calz.

Joe was good at best - never elite. He was in the worst division in boxing. A 25 year old division which was a stepping stone - where one stayed if they wanted to avoid the risks up at 175.

Before meeting Lacy he essentially fought complete nobodies for a decade. He gets credit for victories over Lacy and Kessler though neither is anywhere close to being considered great. At the end, Joe got an ounce of bravery and stepped up to face an OLD OLD Hopkins and an old ruined Roy Jones Jr.

Comparatively Joe is quite close to Sven Ottke, but nowhere near Manny Pacquiao. One guy fights prime fighters, kills great fighters, and climbs many divisions, the other fights a parade of bums for a decade then two old men and promptly retires - yeah, real hard to figure out where they stand respectively as athletes.

A large majority of posters on ESB need to get in the gym and off the internet because they apparently can't tell the difference between the exceptional and Joe Calzaghe, or Ali vis-a-vis a Klitschko, etc., etc., etc.

 

This is actually a good question.

Now, it terms of boxing greatness...its Pacquiao by far.

But that is not the question. I guess we will see the answer when he fight Mayweather. If he really is that 1 dimensional(which i dont think is fair), If he can adapt enough vs a Mayweather etc.

Im pretty sure Calzaghe can swith and adapt vs any opponent. Seems more versatile. Hopkins was a good example.

 

If Pac fought fighters of his own weight class the standard of Robin Reid, Mikkel Kessler, Sakio Bika and the like, he buries them early.

If Calzaghe fought fighters of his own weight class the standard of Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez and the like, he gets beaten.

Pacquiao was a far better fighter.

 

When you're talking over-all adaptability and more tools for the job, easily Calzaghe. There is no style he can't adjust to.

 

Both brilliant fighters. Pacquiao has proven himself against tougher opposition and is a six weight world champion so I definitely give him the edge.

 

So if pacquiao is possibly entering top 20 p4p in his next few fights, where is Joe? Cmon now its hardly fair to compare to Joe to pacquiao.

 

:deal

 

I think possible Calzaghe but....Who ACHIEVED more with his abilities: Pacquiao. And ultimately that's all that matters?

 

Joe never fought fighters even remotely similar to El Terrible, MAB or Dinamita, let alone fight them total SEVEN MUTHA****IN TIMES!!!!!!!!!!