Calzaghe Fans: "Joe was better than Hagler"

Of course there is more to boxing, but the majority of Assassin's posts are his biased opinions. The majority of my posts are factual, and what I say can be backed up if needed.

If you've watched Joe since the ABA's, I respect that. But if that's the case, then surely you agree that although he was GREAT, and he had a great career, it could have been better.

He was content re-signing with Frank W, and defending the WBO belt. Of course, that was his right, and he was entitled to do that. But while ever he was defending that title in Britain, the less chance he had of securing himself big money fights against the worlds best fighters.

The whole "Joe was ducked by everyone, because he was high risk, and low reward" is all nonsense to me.

I think he should have gone to 175 after he couldn't unify with Ottke. He was in his prime, and the possibilities were endless.

But instead of being honest like Eubank, and saying he was content doing what he was doing, Joe liked to play the victim. He's happily told journalists over the years that he was desperate for big fights, but he was avoided etc.

I don't like that. I don't like how he claims he chased Roy for 5-6 years, and was desperate for the fight, when we know what was said in 1999 and in 2002. We know that apart from 94-96 when Joe was young, he never fought in Roy's division until 2008. You can't chase someone that fights in a different weight class.

So, I've never liked how he's carried himself in public. But again, I can appreciate his great skills.

 

Because I don't agree?

What is your criteria for someone to be classed as an ATG?

Tell me the boxes that an ATG should tick, and we'll go through them.

Like I say, I've no problem with anyone that thinks he is an ATG, but I can see why people would disagree.

If you think he is, that's fine. :good

 

My only issue is with people who dont think he's an ATG.

Jones at his peak would have beaten any fighter in history from 175 down IMO.

Hope this gives you clarity.

 

I can see why you'd have an issue. But again, what constitutes as being an ATG?

His ability isn't in question. He had ATG skills.

It's his career path that makes it debatable.

I'm asking you straight, what's the criteria for passing as an ATG in your honest opinion?

Again, whatever criticism I throw at Joe, his skills have never been in doubt.

 

Joe I thought was a shitlord but after watching some more of his fights, he was pretty damn good.

 

He was the dominant force in his (albeit weak) division for a very long time.
Anyone who knows the sport viewed the German 'Ghost' Otkke as anything more than a nuisance AND (like Hagler) I don't believe fighters have to move up in weight.
I believe his unifications against unbeaten fighters sealed the deal.



PS I view Hopkins 20 odd MW defences not much differently than say Deontay Wilders first 28 fights
Hagler fought guys like Hamsho, Hearns, Minter, Roldan, Mugabi etc..
Hopkins? jeez, Simon Brown, Joe Lipsey, and a bunch of WW’s the only win I give him credit for is Keith Holmes!

 

Aww C'mon man get real BOTH Hagler & Hopkins were great champions. Both had to endure losses on their record that were not legit losses. Hopkins to Calzaghe & Taylor twice, Hagler to Leonard.
You only give Hopkins credit for Homes??? Heck Holmes only had the WBC crown because Don King The WBC & Richard Steele conspired to rob Quincy Taylor of the title. Bernard said to Quincy " You were robbed man If I get the chance I'll give him the ass kicking you were going to"
Calzaghe was not fit to carry Haglers jockstrap

 

Still doesnt take away from the fact; Calzaghe UD Hagler. Calzaghe on par on foot and handspeed with SRL but slaps harder.. Clear UD

 

Jon Saxon,

Joe didn't have to move up, but if he wanted bigger fights, and he couldn't unify with Ottke, that's what he should have done. It took him 10 years to unify at 168, and although Kessler was unbeaten, he hadn't beaten any great fighters. As previously mentioned, I'm a fan of Kessler, but I wouldn't class him as a great fighter.

Hopkins's ATG status, is based on his whole career. I have to give him credit for the Trinidad victory. Tito was 28, and he'd looked good at the weight against Joppy. I don't think many people expected Hopkins to beat him like he did. Keith Holmes in my opinion, was a very good and underrated fighter.

 

Its funny how all these people say Hopkins and Hagler were greats and I dont disagree that they were, but Calzaghe was better than them.
Look at Hopkins record and tell me who Hopkins beat that was his own size and better than undefeated Kessler or Eubank? Calzaghe beat both and beat Hopkins. Dont say Trinidad, he was a blown up WW with only one MW fight and no great at the weight even if he is a top fighter P4P. Hagler was beaten by a blown up WW who had come out of retirement, yet old Calzaghe was still beating prime undefeated champs.
To me Hopkins best MW win was arguably Holmes and that is not as good as Lacy, Kessler, Eubank at SMW and arguable to Reid, Mitchell etc
Hopkins best win at LHW is arguably Tarver and Calzaghe beat Hopkins sandwiched between Hopkins best wins of Tarver, Wright and Pavlik.
Hopkins and Hagler are ATGs but not as good as Calzaghe another league above

 

Hagler fought more, fought better opposition, and knocked his opponents out. Calzaghe is not greater then Hagler by ANY means. You are completely delusional and misinformed.

 

This is actually a great fight if it ever happened.. Joe Calzaghe is a superb fighter and always rose to the occasion when he needed to. He was the bigger man and everyone knows a good bigun beats a good smallun

 

Why didn't Calzaghe fight Darius M ???? That was one fight the whole world wanted to see. It wasnt all Darius fault. . Say what you want about Hopkins but Trinidad, Pavlik, Pascal even Cloud were all supposed to beat him. Bernard schooled them all.
You say Lacy was one of Calzaghe's best wins. If so he owes it all to Enzo. Joe wanted to back out "injured" Enzo kicked his ass & MADE him fight. Can you imagine either Hagler or Hopkins acting that way?

 

I've missed our arguments/debates

The Trinidad win was a good win. Tito looked comfortable at the weight in his prime at 28. I don't think anybody expected what happened.

You've got an obsession with undefeated fighters. Who had Kessler beaten before he fought Joe?

Eubank was preparing for another guy, at a different weight, when he was given 11 days notice to prepare for Joe. He then retired two fights later. The guy who Joe fought, wasn't the same guy who'd beaten Eubank and Watson. It was a good win for Joe at 25, but I don't see how it can be classed as GREAT win under the circumstances.

Tarver was a great win for Hopkins. Joe was given the decision against Hopkins, but I wouldn't say that he beat him. I think a draw was a fair result, and it was Joe's quantity over Bernard's quality. I don't think either guy really deserved to win.

How can Joe have been in another league to Hagler and Hopkins?

 

I think if Joe had've moved up to 175 and beat Dariusz, that could have enticed Roy into the ring.

According to Frank W, Joe wanting to pull out last minute against Lacy, wasn't due to an injury. It was a psychological problem, and he and Enzo both had to threaten him.

This is a guy who supposedly wanted a peak version of Roy.