A friendly reminder that you don't know what you're talking about? I mean how can you post something like '99% of Calzaghe's fights were in Cardiff' (how ****ing hard to fact check is that?) and expect to actually have any credibility?
Beat an old Eubank ---> 5+ years of fluff ----> beat a guy whose biggest win was against Robin Reid (**** it, choose any other of his opponents)----> beat a guy whose biggest win was against Anthony Mundine---->beat (didn't destroy, either) an even older Hopkins.
Is this like the internet equivalent of a seven year old putting their fingers in their ears and going 'lalalalalalalala I can't hear you'?
Why don't go find out the actual % of Calzaghe's fights that were in Cardiff, then we can talk truth? Chance for you to actually man up, admit you were talking out of your arse about something which you have no knowledge of and couldn't be bothered to check, maybe restore a slither of credibility. Get to it. What's the percentage?
Honestly, the setting of the fights has little to do with his quality of opposition which is the main topic of this thread. The indisputable truth and main theme of this thread is this: Beat an old Eubank ---> 10+ years of fluff ----> beat (didn't destroy, either) an even older Hopkins. If you'd like to dwell on an exaggerated trivial detail that I used for emphasis (not accuracy) feel free.
The forum warriors strike once again! Joe Calzaghe > You, Your life, everything affiliated with you and your ESB Forum account. lzdie Sorry but I get tired of the wannabe boxing fans on this forum. :smoke
Thanks I will. You see, when you say that someone fought 99% of their fights in a particular location, when actually the correct percentage is 38%, it may give people cause to think that your 'facts' and 'truth' are not worth a great deal.