Calzaghe debate part 2

I agree with this. He was a great champion. Not the greatest, but he passes the level of being an average, passing mention title holder. The man owned his division for a rather long time, and added the division higher to his accomplishments when his career was winding down.

I call that enough, put him in the hall.

 

Calzaghe is great, def HOF. He has weak comp all over his 20 defences but plenty of credible ones too. He was dealt a bad hand with the 168 division, Ottke was the only notable fighter in the division and but he did not want to know.

Should have stepped up earliler, ****** and the injuries also did not help.

He would have won the Super 6.

 

he's definitely a great in my book.

yes it took him longer than he'd have liked to unify the division but he did travel to Germany a couple of times so I believe he wanted the fights.

I reckon from the time he beat Mitchell he was the king of the division (I had Mitchell winning his unification fight with Ottke) and he underlined this with victories over Lacy and Kessler.

He's the second greatest SMW in history and he edged out B-Hop at LHW. His style was difficult to beat and only the best should be favoured over him.

Despite being English I never liked his arrogance but to deny his greatness is a bit unrealistic imo.

 

The guy sure knew how to win fights, didn't he? Funny how other skills and attributes seem to have far more emphasis/value with some folks than the ability to win fights.


And I sure can't think of anyone he fought that thought for a millisecond they were in for an easy night's work when the name on the contract was Joe Calzaghe.

 

My new best friend :good