A Genuine Question For The Fans Of Joe Calzaghe

People think that Calzaghe was avoiding big fights his entire career. Thats BS. He always wanted the big fights, so better late than never, he got them at the end of his career against old fighters.

Another thing, he will ALWAYS get recognition and props for beating a legend, even an old one. If he beats a young prospect he risks much more. Take a look at Jeff Lacy, was undefeated, IBF champ, very dangerous, Joe beat him soundly, was supposed to be the biggest win in his career. What does this win mean now? Nothing. Beating Jones and Hops means much much more.

 

that tito win was not impressive you sound like a desperate joe fan trying to justify and validate his decision. Tito was past his peak way above any weight he'd ever previously fought at coming off a schooling by wright and hadnt fought in two years and jones still looked average. Take your head out of the sand

 

they are also known to turn on the board/manager in a flash and are quite willing to give their players stick.

my point is that pacfan is implying that calzaghe fans follow his twisted version of football culture where we refuse to badmouth our team/man and support to the death. we may support our team to the bitter end but are more likely than ever to be vocal about things we don't like at our club. just like football fans might boo their team off, there were many calzaghe fans not impressed with joe fighting rjj.

 

Right to address the question, which I think I have ascertained though it's posed in a roundabout kind of way. I would class myself as a fan of Calzaghe. I haven't always been, I didn't like his attitude in his early days but he has gradually won me over.

Regarding the Jones fight, I was indifferent to it to be honest though I did watch it (something to do when you get in from a night out at 3am). It does not add anything to his legacy in my eyes. However, I'm not gonna get on his case about it. For years, he has been seeing off some of the top fighters available to him at 168 (Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Woodhall, Mitchell, Sheika, Lacy, Bika, Kessler, Starie to name just a few) and has got absolutely no credit for it from U.S fans. The consensus over there was that as there have been very few decent American fighters at 168 since Jones, it is automatically a poor division.

The guy has received nowhere near the amount of credit he deserves for his accomplishments at 168. Yes, not every opponent was any good and it took him a long time to unify (primarily, I feel, thanks to that w*nker Warren who would be perfectly happy with him beating up tomato cans and retiring at 50-0). The Jones fight (and Hopkins, though he is still an outstanding fighter) gave him credit in the eyes of the average American Joe who just looks at the name Jones and thinks beating him marks JC out as a special fighter. I don't give him any credit for it, however, in my eyes his legacy is already secure and the additional credit he gets for it is payback for what he hasn't had previously. It was a similar situation with Lennox Lewis who dominated the heavies for years while the average U.S fan still thought Tyson was the champ and Lewis didn;t get his recognition until he whupped Tyson's ass. It's not right, it's just the way it is.

As for rematches, Veit is the only one he has ever fought and that was not by choice, it was a mandatory enforced by the WBO. I think a Hopkins rematch would be merited from a sporting perspective. But being purely selfish I am not bothered about it because the first fight was shite, primarily thanks to Hopkins' spoiling and I don't fancy staying up til 4am again for a repeat (though as a boxing fan I know perfectly well that I would end up doing).

Personally, I have never said I won't hear a word said against him, indeed I have said that he spent a little too long fighting in the comfort zone and though he never ducked anyone maybe didn't push hard enough for the biggest fight. Though, to be fair, this wasn't helped by Warren, or by Ottke's reluctance to play ball. But I don't think he is any worse than most fighters. If people have constructive criticisms of him, it is fair enough. However, there is a line between making honest and constructive criticisms and conducting a vendetta.

 

A fairly spot-on analysis, my man.

I think you've come as close to nailing both sides of this phenomenon as anyone yet !

 

i consider myself a calzaghe fan and have some input to your thread. firstly i suppose not many of his fans complained about his fight with jones for a couple of reasons
1)he defended his title 20+ times without a huge payday, and many thought he deserved a big payday after all his mandatory defences.
2)calzaghe said in his autobiography he thought jones was the most talented fighter of his generation and tried to arrange a fight with him years before, and possibly fought better late than never.

secondly I have no interest in a bhop rematch, again there were many reasons:
1)it was a horrible fight to watch, and I as a calzaghe fan would rather see him spend the short time he has left in his career (if it does continue) fighting fighters that come to fight and entertain the paying audience. not come to spoil and intentionally feign injury and cheat.
2)hopkins was racist towards calzaghe, and I dont think he derserves another rematch

you probably wanted a pac maquez rematch because it was entertaining, would you still be so vocal for a rematch if it was a total stinker.

obviously thats just my own opinion so dont know if that corresponds to anyone elses thoughts but none the less hope that answers some of your questions, and get back to me to know what you think!:think

 

the whole point was he was offered a good amount of money at the time when he wasn't a big draw and wasn't getting the paydays, this would have been one of his biggest if not the biggest pay day. What i think is simular to your way of thinking about joe, i am quite confident hopkins would think he could beat joe but would he want to risk his name against a guy who i would agree didn't have the best resume as such at the time.

 

True, good point.

 

Not all Calzaghe fans are blind nut huggers.... IF calzaghe were to lose you would see many of those fans fade away on these forums. That 0 really adds fuel to the fire.

I have seen the same level of ignorance in many PBF fans, they will begin to show themselves more often once Mayweather is active again

 

[quote="TKO";3116466]Right to address the question, which I think I have ascertained though it's posed in a roundabout kind of way. I would class myself as a fan of Calzaghe. I haven't always been, I didn't like his attitude in his early days but he has gradually won me over.

Regarding the Jones fight, I was indifferent to it to be honest though I did watch it (something to do when you get in from a night out at 3am). It does not add anything to his legacy in my eyes. However, I'm not gonna get on his case about it. For years, he has been seeing off some of the top fighters available to him at 168 (Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Woodhall, Mitchell, Sheika, Lacy, Bika, Kessler, Starie to name just a few) and has got absolutely no credit for it from U.S fans. The consensus over there was that as there are have been very few decent American fighters at 168 since Jones, it is automatically a poor division.

The guy has received nowhere near the amount of credit he deserves for his accomplishments at 168. Yes, not every opponent was any good and it took him a long time to unify (primarily, I feel, thanks to that w*nker Warren who would be perfectly happy with him beating up tomato cans and retiring at 50-0). The Jones fight (and Hopkins, though he is still an outstanding fighter) gave him credit in the eyes of the average American Joe who just looks at the name Jones and thinks beating him marks JC out as a special fighter. I don't give him any credit for it, however, in my eyes his legacy is already secure and the additional credit he gets for it is payback for what he hasn't had previously. It was a similar situation with Lennox Lewis who dominated the heavies for years while the average U.S fan still thought Tyson was the champ and Lewis didn;t get his recognition until he whupped Tyson's ass. It's not right, it's just the way it is.

As for rematches, Veit is the only one he has ever fought and that was not by choice, it was a mandatory enforced by the WBO. I think a Hopkins rematch would be merited from a sporting perspective, but being purely selfish I am not bothered about it because the first fight was shite, primarily thanks to Hopkins' spoiling and I don't fancy staying up til 4am again for a repeating (though as a boxing fan I know perfectly well that I would end up doing).

Personally, I have never said I won't hear a word said against him, indeed I have said that he spent a little too long fighting in the comfort zone and though he never ducked anyone maybe didn't push hard enough for the biggest fight. Though, to be fair, this wasn't helped by Warren, or by Ottke's reluctance to play ball. But I don't think he is any worse than most fighters. If people have constructive criticisms of him, it is fair enough. However, there is a line between making honest and constructive criticisms and conducting a vendetta.[/quote]

i think thats a spot on post mate pretty much mirrors my views, if only I had read your post 1st before writing my own post (see above)i could have saved my self a couple of minutes and just copied and pasted yoursatsch

 

I expressed distaste with the Jones match up from the off.

I could understand it, but I didn't like it. I had wanted Pavlik.

 

I wanted Dawson.

But don't forget that Lewis, Hopkins, Lacy, Maliganni and many others, more knowledgeable than I am, picked Jones.

Manny Stewart thought the fight was over in round 1.

 

I agree.