Calzaghe - does he not have one of the most over glorified resumes in boxing history?

Both Mitchell and Woodhall were world champs so there clearly weren't average.But your right about Veit.

 

Yes he does

He has wins over a 39 yr old Roy Jones who had lost 3 of his last 5 fights, 2 of the 3 losses by devastating knockouts.

Then he beat a 43 yr old Hopkins - who had lost 2 of his last 4 fights and was once retired.

Eubank was on his way out ...

Those other 3 so called champions on his resume were not formidable figures in the sport and relative unknown fighters to the US public.

The 168lb division was considered weak ... one of the weakest in all of boxing --

He was also fighting guys who weren't #1 ranked fighters ... he would fight bottom feeders ... Evans Ashira brings me to shame to see that he fought competetively and he was a natural super welterweight and actually went back down after the fight ... a slap in the face to Calzaghe.

 

Sorry to disagree pal but I think if this debate is about fighting these guys in their day lets not forget Joe is 37 now give or take so he managed. And for what its worth if were talking mid 90s here I think Joe beats Roy Jones easier because of work rate and styles and Hopkins has not a prayer

 

pillock

 

Apart from Eubank, Reid and Woodhall, his resume pre-Lacy is **** weak.

 

Wow read what your saying. Firstly the US public dont own the right to world boxing you actualy contribute only population dollars and well thats it. Enough of this he fought old men. Joe was not in his twenties either. And I have all of Jones fights on dvd and he had his share of bums

 

Why is Kessler rated so highly? What has he done? Hausler lol?

I'll judge Calslappies accomplishments on what Kessler accomplishes in the sport. If he gets exposed like Lacy did thats a knock in Slappy Joe's resume.

 

Agree! theres been so many threads about this same ****, possible 2 new every day!! its getting :verysad

 

Eubank wasn't even a top ten ranked fighter when Joe met him.

 

No mate just champion of the world

 

No he wasn't!

 

You may be right...good pernt ( point ):hi:

 

When Eubank met Joe he was a stand in who took the fight at a few weeks notice and wasn't even champ. He was also weight draining. All his defeats (five) came in his last nine fights, one of those to Joe; that indicates his state and level of decline at the time. He was also inactive for two years at the weight, and his only fights during that time were two matches against absolutely diabolical opponents (check them out, they really are truly terrible - more sort of exhibition fights) in the middle east, and at Light Heavy. That depleted version of Eubank gave what Joe says is his hardest fight ever.

Eubank wasn't even considered worthy of a top ten super-middle rating by Ring magazine at the time he fought Joe. In fact he hadn't been thought of by Ring as a top ten SMW or any weight boxer for 3 years prior to facing Joe. Eubank in his prime rode high in the list for years, sitting only behind the likes of Toney, and RJJ. They simply believed that he had deteriorated to such a degree that they no longer thought him good enough to warrant an inclusion.

When you consider the limited names that made the Ring magazine ten at the time Eubank fought Joe - the likes of Henry Wharton, Joseph Kiwanuka, Vincenzo Nardiello; it really highlights how far removed from his best Ring magazine believed Eubank to be. Even Jones at this moment in time, who is absolutely shot to pieces, makes todays LH top ten.

 

Mikkel Kessler and Bernard Hopkins are the key names. Two great wins.

 

I don't think Woodhall is a great a fighter by any means (anywhere near the class of Joe) but too be fair he to was on his last legs when Joe beat him.


Steve Collins opinion on Eubank at the time...

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected