Calzaghe must be top 10 atg ?

I think that if you make the hof you have definitely been recognised by your peers as a great fighter. I think that is a consensus opinion.

Atg is the next level in my eyes and that is where subjectivity comes into it; there are many different criterias ranging from resume to h2h and everything in between. For instance I might say "if you're a top 25 in my all time p4p list I think you're an atg" the problem is, someone who is classed as atg loses that classification in time (gentleman james corbett for example). Like now, I might have, say, mclarnin, np dempsey and canzoneri in my top 25. Once pac, floyd and hopkins finish their career and retire they may well take place in my top 25 pushing those 3 out, do they then stop being atg's?

 

Calzaghe is not a top 10 atg

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323230

Hopkins is not a top 10 ATG either, and Hopkins is (way) ahead of Calzaghe.

 

@bailey.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions. We do not need to discuss this further.

My final word is the 3 will be remembered like this:

Hopkins
Jones (closely together, opposite order if you put more emphasis on skillset.

There are too many other boxers inbetween to mention joe in any representative fashion.

Good day sir.

 

agree completely.

i'd say if hopkins retired today without facing dawson, he cracks my top 25. if he beats dawson and goes on to defeat cloud, shumenov and cleverly, i don't even wanna speculate how highly i might rank him.

one thing i'll say is he's done enough so far to make my top 25, losing to dawson makes no difference considering he's over 10 years past his prime.

 

Calzaghe is not even a top 50 fighter. atsch

 

i have hopkins higher than yourself, top 25 imo, one place ahead of jones jr.

 

ah for me that's how the title of a great is earned. if the boxing writer's of the time vote you in the hof you've cracked it imo.

yeah that does make some sense, but then it's just kinda like another "hall" if you will, a subset of the HOF. kinda loses it's meaning for me in that way.

things like this will always make people disagree, for instance i'd call sullivan an atg heavyweight but he'd never be classed as an atg in a p4p sense, a lot of connotations.

 

Hopkins is WAYYYYY ahead of calzaghe and Hopkins isnt near top 10 either

 

resume alone maybe so, but considering he spent 9 years as the premiere mw and then at age 40 went on a string of victories against p4p top ten opposition culminating currently in him being regarded as the premiere lhw in the world, a staggering 17 years after winning his first world title, and during that time span his only unavenged loss was to the unified smw champ (i'll keep it as a loss till the day i watch it and re-score differently).

i'm satisfied he could have been given a draw vs mitchel. he has points victories over taylor and jones. his draws to mercado and pascal were robberies. that leaves the only blips as being a debtabale loss to calzaghe.

hopkins also holds the distinction of only ever losing to an undefeated fighter.

his accomplishments and legacy are right up there with the best of them. h2h he overcame a multitude of styles. his style might not be the most impressive but put the 97-02 hopkins in the ring with every middleweight in history and he'll beat the vast majority of them.

resume wise, yeah not overly great but look at the best middleweights of his era: jones, joppy, holmes, taylor, wright, pavlik. by cards he has beaten all of these men plus unified with the other two belt holders. he beat the best out there.

lacking victories over a prime jones and a prime toney, i'll agree. but if you add them in considering his longevity he'd crack top 15 imo. he doesn't have any ghosts hanging over his head of "never really the best mw because he didn't beat ......"

when i hear the word hopkins, the words "serious elite" follow naturally imo.

i've never been a fan of his, his style wasn't particularly pleasing, and until recently i've never really liked his character.

but looking back to 96 when he was wholly regarded as the premiere mw, look through the other divisions, who was at the top then and still at the top now? his longevity genuinely "floors" me. i can accept people not rating him as high as i do, but to me it's clear. this man is a legend and has earned his place with the elite.

 

that's fair enough i mean i wouldn't argue too fiercely with say someone telling me griffith and canzoneri rank above hop. i take accomplishments and legacy into account more than most (hence my having bobby fitz as the goat :good)

 

HANG ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a disagreement doesn't end so civilly on esb!!!!!!!!

where was the cum guzzling tranny remarks? comments about my repulsive v-cash? where was the re-itteration of the same points!!!!!