Calzaghe announces retirement

Wasn't Ricardo Lopez lineal?

Sven Ottke?

 

Lineal is an opinion.... belt holders are an opinion.... Its the sport.Calzaghe doesn't stand out for me. He's just a decent fighter who never fought anybody with a good chance of beating him... Nothing more, nothing less. Ricardo Lopez beat some great fighters and future/former champions at their peak. He's in a different class completely to zaggy...

Closest comparitive record I can find.....

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=4681&cat=boxer

If this guy hadn't of moved out of his comfort zone he prob would have retired unbeaten too. Great wins on that record too....

 

Ouch!

 

You cannot be for real with a comment like that.

 

If these credentials are not impresive then why has nobody else replicated them however protected they were or however weak their level of oposition?

The fact is that it is virtualy imposible to establish yourself as the top fighter in your weight class over a sustained period of time and remain unbeaten however easy you take it.

If it wasnt then half a dozen other fighters would have done it over the past 50 years.

 

I am trying to detach myself from what Isee on the film and look at his resume in a historical perspective.

In that context I have to acknowledge that it does stand out because nobody else has done it over the past 50 years.

What if he did fight weak opposition?

A lot of fighters have fought weak opposition over the past 50 years and they still never managed to establish themself asthe top fighter in two weight classes and remain unbeaten.

 

Problem is most on this board havent been watching boxing long enough to remember a prime Lopez. Memories here are so shallow its not funny. A prime Lopez was untouchable in his weight class. I still remember the day he retired like it was yesterday. Now the comparison with Nielsen and Joe is a good one. As is another comparison with Artur Grigorian. These guys fought no one of no note and cherry picked there entire career. Even when Nielsen fought a shot Mike Tyson he got his huge body blasted half way across the ring by a career heavy Mike.

 

Thats rubbish. You MUST by ALL accounts understand the nature of his victories and most of all WHEN he fought his opposition. A ledger littered with club fighters and journeymen is nothing to gloat about. A career defined by 2 men hugely past there physical primes is nothing to gloat about in the slightest. Joe has never had a career that featured the dominance of Hopkins or Jones. Both those men are All Time Greats. Joe is not. He`s just a guy who defended a spurious title that no one back then paid any attention to apart from Warren, and a ledger punctuated by 2 victories over old men. Joe WILL be forgotten very quickly. Thats the truth.

 

It really just shows the complete bias of people here, bringing up Ricardo Lopez as if hes got the strongest resume to be seen. Lopez's resume has always been seen as weak, with guys he should have fought and didn't. Stop trying to fool people who don't know better.

Brien Nielsen?! Get the hell out of here, nobody rated Nielsen as a good fighter regardless of record. On film he is not even close. Horrible comparison.

 

Because they were busy fighting other GREAT fighters. Shane DLH Jones Hopkins Tito Cotto etc ALL moved up through multiple weights succesfully and into the twilights and during there careers continued to face the best challenges out there and won in dominant fashion. Statiscally it looks nice. Greatness in boxing isnt measure dby statistics.

 

This must be the worst post ever. Sorry.

What if he did fight weak opposition?

Taking it from a different angle.....

Arsenal went unbeaten through a PL season and rightly get a lot of praise.... people will still recognise it in 50 years time.

Take that same Arsenal team and put them in League 1...... if they did the same thing, would anybody really care?

Don't think I would......

There are so many former champions on his record it is untrue. Whilst an opponent's achievements after a fight could be classed (with fair reasoning) as irrelevant.... if a guy then loses his next two fights by stoppage against crap fighters, the win doesn't mean all that much. If the guy then strings together five or six wins against good opposition and wins a world title, then that win carries weight.

So many of Calzaghe's opponents achieved absolutely **** all afterwards. Don't tell me that Joe ruined them all, cos it's bull****.

 

While some of your criticisms are valid you still have to take the good with the bad. Incidentaly I was verry critical of him and his level of competition before the Lacey fight.

There have been heaps of protected fighters throughout history who feasted on secon teir opposition over most of their careers and still it took 50 years to get one with Calzaghes paper credentials.

The bottom line is that he has been ranked as the No1 168 pounder since 2002. He picked up every belt worth having at that weight. He also established himself as the best fighter at 175 lbs by beating Hopkins.

I think history will have to give him his due despite the flaws in his leger.

 

Jeff Lacy.... fair wins?

Who exactly?

He lost one of the fights clearly, and another was very close. Don't even start with the gay porno against Manfredo - Bika showed him up for the clubfighter that he is.