Better Legacy: Calzaghe or Chris John?

Joe and its not even close. But to be honest, Joe's best wins were when Bhops, Roy Jones, and Eubank were past their prime. Of course, Hopkins and Eubank were still very good when Joe beat them, but not at their best.

That excuse for a champion Chris "The Salamander" John claim to fame is winning 3 rounds against Marquez and winning a hometown decision.

 

Calzaghe. This is honestly a stupid questiion. Joe was the long time legitimate world super middleweight champion and the legitimate world light heavyweight champion. Chris John has only been a top featherweight who wouldn't fight the best. Since Marquez, he has fought mostly second-raters.

 

Most people think Hopkins won. Some people think Slappy lost to Robin Reid also.

 

Calzaghe.

I don't think anyone much in the western world rate John too much. Most of his competition is probably too unknown to most.

Add a poll. Would be interesting!

 

Calzaghe, i think he fought the better fighters plus unified and moved up and won the RING belt

he took more risks than john and i think thats why i rate him higher

 

Is this some kind of sick joke?

 

I'm a huge Chris John fan. I feel he is very underrated. But on ESB Joe too is underrated. He clearly accomplished more by beating better fighters than John has.

 

I guarantee you, most people in this thread that are asserting that this is such an outrageous comparison have likely never even seen John box and probably aren't even familiar enough with his quality of op beaten to reach an educated conclusion on who has the better legacy. And are just reacting with knee-jerk fanboy-ism or just plain ignorance.

I'm not familiar enough with John's overall opposition to reach a conclusion myself, but based on what i've seen in the Marquez & Juarez fights, he was a very talented, slick, fast & crafty boxer. And has (or had) p4p level ability. If he was based primarily in the U.S. like he SHOULD'VE been, he'd be more highly regarded and probably would've been forced to take on all the top fighters @ Featherweight, in which i think he would've beat everybody (Salido, Juama, Ponce etc.) outside of Gamboa.

BTW scored his fight with Marquez a draw. The scorecards were outrageous though.

 

Both kinda ran after the first scare.
Calzaghe really got his career going at LHW (popularity wise) but decided to bag it in after two 40 year olds dropped him with ease. He could have done a lot more at the weight in just a year. He was a young 36 year old.

Chris John got a BS draw fighting in USA for the first time and kinda ran away. Now he is content in beating the top 20 contenders but not the top of the division.

Overally i can say that John has a done a bit more but P4P Calzaghe might be more skilled.

 

John did more? Thats why hes a lineal undisputed champ like Joe was right? thats why john is a p4p rated fighter like joe was. John isnt close to joe

 

Marquez got robbed against Chris John.


This isn't even close. Calzaghe is by far the better fighter than John.

 

John has done literally nothing worth mentioning besides hold a single belt for a long time and defend against nobody. Calzaghe did the same thing without picking up a draw like John, and he managed to build a fanbase because he's exciting. 50000 people don't show up to watch John.

Calzaghe also unified the 168 division and won the title at 175, with a few big fights on his resume (Eubank, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins). John has Marquez.

To catch up John needs to:
1. Unify his division.
2. Win the title at the next division up.
3. Beat 3 or 4 big names (Rigondeaux, Donaire, Mares, Garcia, Gamboa)

John's division and the two closest to it are full of talented fighters and big names. In addition to the 5 stars above, you have these guys who are at last recognizable: Salido, Ponce De Leon, Gonzalez, Caballero, Gradovich, Darchinyan, Hasegawa, Uchiyama, etc. There's no excuse for a resume like John's when you have the opportunities he has. He's just lazy, content, and unwilling to take a challenge.

 

Sven Ottke