Atg With Thinnest Resume Ever? Joe C

That's a whole lot of bull****

Kessler is much better than Johnson

Joe was much more paranoid about his hands at that stage of his career. He's learnt to accept it, and has developed other aspects of his game as a response. Genuine injuries

 

His redord is not great but who has Hopkins beat???? the biggest names on his resume are Taylor and Jones and guess what he lost to them.

Otke, Veit, Kessler, Lecy, Brewer, Eubank are his 6 best fights.

 

You ****ing clown do you remember Trinidad? Who is better than all that you just mentioned, Winky Wright, member him? You ****ing clown

 

He's still got a fair point

Hopkins lost to the first decent genuine middleweight he faced, which somewhat takes away from his achievements at the weight. He boosted his reputations over 'names' that were at a physical disadvantage

He got schooled by RJJ, enough said

Wright was like a balloon at LHW, it was a boring as **** fight, and neither came out with any real credit. If this was actually at MW, it would have been far more impressive, but then again Wright might have won. Clever match making, just like the Tarver fight

 

This is where I have a major problem

Why would beating Dawson/Pavlik mean any more than beating Kessler?

Everybody knows Pavlik is a flawed fighter. He's just not quite elite, I think even the yanks know it. He has great power, great heart but his boxing skill is medicore to good, and his defence/chin leaves a lot to be desired. Quite frankly, Kessler would murder him, and the results of a poll were pretty conclusive on here

Dawson who? He's done very little. If Joe won, it would be put down to his inexperience. It's a nothing fight. The only thing remotely impressive would be winning at LHW

At least you can justify Hopkins by saying he's a name. The others just make it look like you only rate victories against yanks

 

First off let me say that I mean no disrespect... But you automatically assume that Calzaghe has to prove he is on the same level of the American fighters. Why is this the case? You stated yourself that Calzaghe is the legitimate draw since he is undisputed at his weight class... I would accept your logic if you simply said it like it is; that it's bull****, but to get recognition you have to fight the big American names regardless of your skill level and your accomplishments otherwise.
I believe like many others do that a lot of people judge Calzaghes resume without knowing the boxers behind the names simply because they are not on the radar of the American boxing scene.

I'm not a huge fan of Calzaghe by the way I'm just a bit annoyed by the flawed logic of these discussions. I think it was Sean who said it best; look at the fighters, judge their skill and rate them.

Merry Christmas by the way

 

First of all, Joe is not generally regarded yet as an ATG

Secondly: when was he supposed to fight Toney?

The last fight Toney won at SMW was in July, 1994. He lost his last ever SMW fight to Roy in November, 1994. After that, he steadily gained weight and fought in other divisions at weights up to 240.

In July of 1994, Joe had fought six times. By November, he had seven fights. He wasn't even a contender yet for a SMW title.

When was he supposed to have fought Toney ?

Calzaghe tried to arrange a fight with Bernard.

According to SHOWTIME'S Jay Larkin:

This content is protected

- Jay Larkin.

So yes, a calzaghe-Hopkins fight would have been great in 2002, but you can't put the blame on Joe for it not happening.

And you can be sure Bernard's reason for moving up to 175 had much more to do with spotting a beatable Tarver with a good reward-to-risk ratio, than his scorn for the 168.


Joe won his 168 lb title in Oct, 1997. It had been a year at that time since Roy had been at 168. One of them would have had to move. And it's no more Joe's fault than Roy's that it didn't happen.

Personally, I believe that Roy would have embarrassed Joe (or anyone else) at 168.

Joe's resume doesn't tell the whole story.

 

:good

 

Calzaghe has beaten fighters like Eubank, Reid, Lacy and Kessler. I think that is a pretty good resume, everybody said he would never beat Lacy, but he crushed Lacy's career, then after that everybody said Lacy was ****, so he beats Kessler and everybody thinks he's no good.
Next Joe is going to beat Hopkins, and everybody will say B-Hop was an old man, even though Joe wanted to fight him years ago, when they where both in their prime. Joe will never get the reconition he deserves.

 

:good

 

At the time Joe fought Lacy, Lacy was undefeated and was highly rated.

And beating the undefeated Kessler is definitely the high note on Joe's resume.

And the manner that Joe beat them counts for something.

 

How many threads are there like this? Calzaghe doesnt have the best resume by FAR but he doesnt have the worst either.

Hindsight is a great thing, but how many of you were saying Lacy was **** prior to Calzaghe ripping him a new a-hole? Oh im sure most people here called it, these days everyone seems to have known Lacy was overhyped before the fight.. yet pre-Calzaghe he was the next big thing.

I find it funny how people say Kessler isnt a good fighter because he hasnt beaten anyone significant. Hasnt anyone got the ability to judge whether a fighter is good WITHOUT seeing him in with an great fighter? Watch him fight, you should be able to see the quality.

Calzaghe's resume is highly underrated because everyone thinks its absolutely crap and hes beating nobody, he has a few good wins and a decent resume.

 

Exactly.