Calzaghe-Lacy performance of the decade

you praised Calzaghe

so your obviously a clown who knows nothing about boxing ot a troll

thats how it goes round here right?

atsch

 

Nah..

The Lacy fight may be exposure of the decade!

But we now know that it definitely wasn't performance of the decade. It frankyl didn't take that much for a good fighter to beat Jeff in every round. That is just a fact. Jeff was a marketing product and beating him like that was the easy part. Matching him to reach that fight was the hard part for his promoters.

 

I thought Hopkins Pavlik was the exposure of the decade ?? This is what happens when hype meets a fight ..Lacy same as Kelly were the futures of the 160 and 168 divisions and would have been crown p4p best if they had won ..I have to agree it was great match making by the promoters .

 

It was a fantastic performance. Great for boxing. To this day I'll never understand why more American fans didn't get on Calzaghe's bandwagon after that. The ratings from the Kessler fight were a disaster. I'm sure the suits at HBO and Showtime are still scratching their heads over that one.. It had every ingredient an audience could have appreciated, aside from a little bit more genuine artistry.

 

Calzaghe was a quality operator who could have competited with Jones,Toney etc in there primes... I feel he was held back by Warren or we could be possible talking about one of the all time greats!!

Jeff Lacy was a hyped up B-C Grade fighter.. I must say Dan Birmingham left his fight WAY WAY WAY to long in there.. Ruined his career

 

This fight is starting to get overrated.

Tell me. Is this "star" fighter he dominated a proven champion bound to HOF? Or is an ATG? Or was just a good limited champ hyped to no end by the US boxing media desperately looking for the next Tyson prior to that fight?

It was a great performance by Calzaghe, no doubt, but I am dead-certain it is not the most dominant performance of the decade by a boxer. I would even rank his win over Kessler as better.

MAB - Hamed, Pacquaio - MAB, Hopkins - Trinidad are comparably some of the better fights if you want to see a dominating performance against an equally proven champion.

 

No Way. It was good but not the best. Barrera, Floyd and Hopkins have topped that performance, to name 3

 

Yes. Although personally I wouldn't put Lacy and Pavlik on the same level. Pavlik afterall beat a good reigning champion twice for his title. Lacy never beat a champion - not even a top 10 fighter! before Calzaghe. The only one he has ever beaten who can be considered a top 10 fighter at the time they met is Tsypko and some people think he lost that. Reid was old and semi-retired when they met (top 30 at the most), Pemberton was 40 or so and was never good anyway (top 50 or so), and Sheika was also semi-retired and no more than top 30-40 or so when they met. Good match-making in a sense.

Pavlik on the other hand has some real wins and the Hopkins defeat is probably more about Hopkins being very clever than Pavlik being bad. Imo.

 

Agreed ..And also Sheika kind of exposed Lacy before his fight with Joe ..Anyone who followed Lacy up until Calzaghe knew what he was in for .Great pts man :good

 

Calzaghe beat Lacey (well, or badly, depending on your take).
End of conversation.
How well?
A cheeky punch round his back from perfect.

This is a fact.

Love, JC or not, this is a fight stat....(I'm not the JC....I've had the initials longer than him.)

 

knockdown evened it out.

 

Calzaghe made it look easy.

 

Because it was easy. It was the same as any other Calzaghe fight against a 10-15 ranked fighter - except for the hype.

 

Lacy wasn't a star by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Inside the ring it was a performance like many other Calzaghe performances against someone who had never beaten a top 10 fighter.

Only the marketing wrapping was different.