Hopkins was 43 when they fought. Hopkins would take Joe C. to school if he was younger. Joe C. likes to fight boxers who should retire... that is his M.O. This content is protected Calzaghe This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected Outside of Kessler and Lacy, Joe C's resume is HORRENDOUS. FACT. :deal He has avoided the top competition his entire career. Fighting the best fighters in Wales doesn't make you an all-time great... it makes you an all-time great cherry picker. Joe C. is only the greatest of Wales, nowhere else. Instead of cherry picking the names you think are decent fighters, why don't you look at his other 12+ title defences he made against... guess who: tomato cans who beat other worse tomato cans to get a title shot. Over half of Joe C's title defenses were against nobodies who didn't deserve a title shot. (A bunch of Gary Lockett clones essentially.) Now he fights Roy Jones at 39... another fighter who is on his way out. Typical Joe C. cherry picking. And for the record, I wouldn't be nearly as hard on Joe if he didn't call himself an all-time great and a "legend killer." LOL - What a joke. If he wants to be called an all-time great, his record is going to be dissected and it is WEAK. Best fighter from Wales is the only title he has ever earned. :deal
Yeah he's a real world traveler. He fights Mario Veit in Germany AFTER he already KO'd him in 1 round in there previous fight. ANd he fought Will McIntyre in Denmark. Don't make him out to be Glen ****in Johnson cause he's not. And Hopkins fought Mercardo in Ecuador.
If you want to get into situational factors with fighters you'll find that boxing history is littered with great fighters who beat guys "on their way out, losers of their last ___ fights, former champions who never won titles again, and plenty of non-entities." You can come up with all types of excuses surrounding the circumstances of a particular fighter's opponents but at the end of the day you cannot deny what's in the record book. If you're gonna discredit Joe Calzaghe for the explanations that you took from other posters you might as well start doing it with every other ATG to lace up the gloves.
Genaro Hernandez, Deigo Corrales, Jose Luis Castillo, Jesus Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, Angel Manfredy, DeMarcus Corley, Arturo Gatti(old), Sharmba Mitchell(old) Zab Judah, Carlos Baldomir, De La Hoya(old), Ricky Hatton. You are gonna compare that to Eubank(old), Robin Reid, Richie Woodhall, Byron Mitchell, Charles Brewer, Jeff Lacy, Mikkel Kessler, Hopkins(old) and if he beats RJJ(shot) Come on really Mayweather blows his resume out of the water. Lets not be silly.
Thank you.:good You are one of the few Calzaghe fans who isn't looking through rose-colored glasses. I swear I would be a bigger Cal an if it wasn't for such a large number of huggers who think he is the greatest thing since the invention of the blowjob.
Joe wasn't to eager to fight Glen Johnson.......... And how many fighters on Calzaghe resume would beat Hopkins??
If you're looking at them in terms of greatness/quality, Carl Thompson does not belong in the same ring as Chris Eubank. The Cat only won because of size and how worn Eubank was. They are a different standard of fighter altogether IMO.
This makes little sense. Hopkins has only had three fights post-Taylor. Even if we ignore the Manfredo and Bika fights for Calzaghe (and lets ignore them, they were basically fights made at the behest of US TV on the basis that most of the American boxing viewing public are too ignorant to watch a fight involving fighters who don't live in the USA) then Calzaghe's resume post-Lacy (win over prime Kessler, win over Hopkins in the US) is clearly superior to Hopkins post-Taylor resume (win over post-prime Tarver, win over post-prime, out of his weightclass Wright, loss to Calzaghe).
You cant ignore them, That was the point i was making, while Joe won his big fight with the up and comer, he stagnated for 18 months before Kessler,as i pointed out. Whereas Bhop who lost to his up and comer and went on to fight Tarver and Winky then Joe with Pavlik to come. Everybody there except Winky was the man at their respective divisions, past prime or not. While Joes foes were not (except Bhop, Kessler had 2 titles but Joe was widely regarded as the man), that goes a long way to peoples perceptions of a resume and IMO why the gap grows after the 2005/6 fights.
'Everybody' except Winky basically equals Tarver and Calzaghe. One of which he lost. Meanwhile Calzaghe fought Kessler, the recognised number two at the weight (and Joe couldn't fight himself, the number one, clearly...) and Hopkins, the number one at the division above. And won both. And of course I can ignore Manfredo and Bika. We know the purpose of those fights, but they do not impact on Calzaghe's resume. In terms of the fights that do impact on the resumes, Hopkins took on two in the period you reference and won one, Calzaghe took on two and won both.
hahahahaha. your insane. ottke was a total ****. why the **** would he call out ottke only to travel all the way to germany to get robbed by the ref or a decision. atsch atsch atsch
The point I was making is about who they fought after the 2005/6 fights, not about whether Joe has a better win record since those fights. Since those fights Bhops will be Tarver,Winky,Calzaghe and Pavlik, While Joes is Bika,Manfredo,Kessler,Bhop and Roy. All but Winky were the the recognized best for Bhop while all but Bhop were not the recognized best for Joe, Kessler obviously deserves special mention coz as you say he was the no.2 and undeafeated,prime and very dangerous, more so IMO than Tarver and Winky. But when people look back on the period im talkling about 05/6-08 Bhops opposistion is stronger, and this for me is where the gap people have grows.
This is about where I stand. Plus Calzaghe beats Hopkins during their primes. :good Yeah Jones beats him (UD) and the likes of Tarver and Toney have a fine chance, but that's about it.