Calzaghe & Mayeather's CV / Resume , is there much difference ???

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by thewinfella, Feb 17, 2010.


  1. essexboy

    essexboy The Cat Full Member

    4,063
    4
    Jul 12, 2009
    Cheers mate, I'll have a good read of that, the first few pages seem very entertaining. I love the way he keeps saying lets stop with the insults (which he started) and talk boxing. But you cant debate with someone as stubborn and ill-informed as that. I know the type, they're the worst as they have no desire to learn, they just want to shout their stupid opinions loudly and hope someone agrees with them. I know they shouldnt irritate me but they do.
     
  2. icemax

    icemax Indian Red Full Member

    27,158
    2
    Apr 24, 2008
    :good
     
  3. s23041983

    s23041983 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,180
    0
    Nov 12, 2008
    ok ill concede that one! jim driscoll was good!! i also had a look at ted lewis, it said he won in every division from bantamweight up to heavyweight... were the weight divisions much different back then or something?
     
  4. 'Ben'

    'Ben' Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,307
    1
    Mar 8, 2009
    Not as much of a difference as many would believe I have to admit. It's an arguement I've brought up before myself. Mayweather still has the slighty more impressive CV.
     
  5. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,470
    Sep 7, 2008
    :lol:
     
  6. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,470
    Sep 7, 2008
    Yeah, there was only 8, and fighters fought often, sometimes giving up massive amounts of weight.

    I believe Ted Lewis once fought for the European Heavyweight title:lol:

    There is footage of him fighting George Carpentier, a former Welterweight who ended up fighting Jack Dempsey (amongst others) at Heavyweight.

    So, to elaborate on my earlier point. Like any opponent, I think there are still fighters nowadays that could beat older fighters of course, styles make fights. But fighters from previous eras had harder careers and therefore had to prove themselves even moreso in my opinion.

    And when people say 'they're so bad technically' I actually think in some cases it would make them very awkward opponents for 'modern' fighters.

    And for those that think older fighters would get blown out of the water, I present you with this:

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-6rWIzAYow[/ame]
     
  7. TFFP

    TFFP The Eskimo

    45,002
    3
    Nov 28, 2007
    :lol:
     
  8. s23041983

    s23041983 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,180
    0
    Nov 12, 2008
    well, ive had a lesson on boxing in this thread. nice one fleaman :good
     
  9. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,470
    Sep 7, 2008
    I really hope I don't come across as pretentious though, I'm not trying to get on me high horse, only offering proof to the contrary belief that older fighters were technically inferior.

    Whilst the vid I offered is not of a fighter with a conventional 'textbook' style, Canzoneri was a fighters who's style would work in ANY era, which is the reason I picked him. The whole 10 minutes is well worth watching :good
     
  10. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    Is there a video where modern fighters were filmed on an old style camera?
     
  11. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,470
    Sep 7, 2008
    I don't think that Canzoneri footage suffered from being 'sped up', nor do I think 'old cameras' enhance ability in an aesthetic sense. There are **** hot fighters now, they just don't have the depth in resume to be considered amongst the upper echelons of 'all time greats' in my opinion. There are obvious exceptions to the rule, Hopkins, Jones and Pac featuring quite high on my list.