???
No at all...I don't think that...but the fighters that CALZAGHE FOUGHT were not great fighters. Not because they were European, just in general....
10 or 11 world champions? You mean 10 or 11 WBO bull**** champions??? He never beat an undisputed or universally recognized champion...He beat...
To be the best, you BEAT the best. Joe fought Eubank, Reid, Brewer, and all kinds of unknown "Eurochamps" who were never more than fringe contenders.
Well, Eubank was his first really "well known" fight against a well-known fighter. Lacy was the second, and Lacy was an overhyped bum. You...
Not pig ignorant, fact. Between 1997 (Eubank) and 2006 (Lacy), Calzaghe was defending his bull**** WBO title against nothing more than European...
It's amazing how cocky you can be when Calzaghe has only beaten overhyped European WBO contenders and some cab drivers...
1) This might be the worst attempt at legitimate boxing analysis that I've ever seen on this site. 2) This might be the most poorly written...
I'm telling you...Hopkins will let Calzaghe attack, he'll be dirtier than James Toney (who never fouls), but it will be the same thing......
The interviewer is a moron
Mark my words....
That's how the fight will look...
Eubank is nowhere near Hopkins in terms of accomplishments as a fighter. I liked Eubank, but he isn't even close. He never was an undisputed...
The 44-0 thing is stupid...Look at who he fought... In particular, look at who he fought from the time he won the WBO title (Eubank) and...
Awwww, are you offended??? Maybe you need a kleenex or a hug...:thumbsup
