Calzaghe versus Kessler rematch, who would you pick...

I like Kessler and have defended his style and record on the British boxing forum a number of times.

But really...why exactly do we NEED to see this again? Kessler was beaten convincingly. There is no need for an immediate rematch.

Its like you said risk-reward ratio. What exactly would a rematch prove for Calzaghe? He has already beaten him convincingly.

RJJ - Tarver 1 was close enough to merit an immediate rematch. Castillo - Mayweather 1 controversial, so rematch.

Everyone knows Calzaghe won and by a sizeable margin. Kessler - JC 2 at the minute makes no sense at all.

Legacy wise, Hopkins, Dawson and yes Pavlik would add more layers to JC's resume than an immediate rematch with Kessler.

Kessler has to go back and prove a little something before any interest would be raised in this fight.

 

Yeah...this is what I said too

About Hopkins...it's only interesting because of styles and because of the strategical/mental/moral battle to me; legacy wise, it's not even close as important as the Kessler fight.

Pavlik...same...he is a MW who would need at least one year to become a true SMW - if he climbs up quickly he'll just be overblown or a small SMW...Calzaghe is a big SMW...not a huge legacy fight, whatever the titles and accolades involved...

Only other legacy fight out there for Calzaghe is Dawson, if he gets past Johnson (experience and cunning) and Diaconu (puncher and pressure)...otherwise...that's about it.

 

I agree with that...but thats a keen boxing observer's point of view.

Lets be honest, boxing publications, writers and historian as well as the largely ignorant American fans would regard a victory over Hopkins or Pavlik even now to be more signficant than Kessler...rightly or wrongly.

 

Well, for sure, and since Calzaghe is not looking to prove himself to himself but rather to everyone else, particularly to the Americans, this is bound to affect his choice of next opponent in a critical way.

Still, for me as a fan of Calzaghe and of boxing, in general, I will be more interested in some of the subtler aspects of the fights he has left, against whomever, rather than in the result on boxrec and the public accolades...unless he fights a proven Dawson that is, in which case, it's about legacy again, for me.

 

I want Dawson as a boxing fan. As a Calzaghe fan who wants to see him gain recognition, im not to keen.

Why? I just know that should Calzaghe win convincingly they will spin it and state that Dawson had only beaten the limited Adamek and an old Johnson and was simply a hyped prospect.

That pisses me off but its what they would say....so im torn on that score.

 

I think this is the wrong attitude. I get angry when I see the underrating, the lack of recognition, the crazy p4p rankings, etc too...but when you think about it more, you say: **** it! Who cares what a bunch of biased/corrupt/poor analysts think??? I'd rather I knew in my heart's heart that Calzaghe was better than Dawson than to have everyone else say: "Yeah, he's the greatest!", because he beat Pavlik...

...Calzaghe will never get the recognition he dserves from his detractors even if he beats Hopkins and Pavlik, because they'll always say: why didn't you fight a prime Hopkins, an RJJ in his prime or a Glen Johnson in his prime, or all three?...and there's no getting away from that, rightly or wrongly.

...So, as I said many times before, Calzaghe should give up trying to impress the powers that be, and fight the hardest fights out there, if he feels up to it...at least then, he'll gain legacy points with the objective good analysts...

 

Can't argue with that mate. We may get the best of both worlds yet anyway...hopefully the fight with Hopkins will satisfy the ignorant idiots and a Dawson fight could yet be made...

 

Let's hope so...:good

 

And that would have been more of a robbery than the Reid-Ottke fight.:nut

 

just cause Calzaghe beat Kessler convincingly doesn't automatically mean that Kessler cannot win a rematch. In a competitive fight like the one between Kessler and Calzaghe, on one day Calzaghe might win and on another it could be Kessler.

I would love to see a rematch

 

:-( :-(

Poor Amsterdam, he's played so many mindgames on ESB that now people are suspicious of every single thread he's starting; everyone is looking for the hidden agenda and the acute angles...and when they cannot spot any, they still assume they must be there, by virtue of this being a tread related to Calzaghe...

This content is protected

:deal

 

edit

 

Except it wasn't competitive after maybe 3 rounds.

 

Calzaghe beat Kessler by two rounds - so lets not make it into a story about Kessler being outboxed - he got outsmarted on the night - partly because of Calzaghe's talent and ability to adapt and partly because Kessler and his corner went into the fight without a plan B. I think they where simply overconfident.

I agree that it's very unlikely that a rematch will become relevant - Kessler needs a win against Miranda + Pavlik to make him relavant again ... and to get to Pavlik he has to pass through Taylor - so that's three hard fights (both hard to make and hard to win) - by then Calzaghe will have retired or mayby faded. But if Calzaghe is still around and Kessler can win his fights - then the first fight was close enough to make a rematch ok.

As for who wins? - well the first fight wasn't as loopsided as some here seems to think. As I said two rounds for Kessler and he'd still be worldchampion. When we see Kessler versus Miranda in the US, then we'll proberbly be able to see if he has learned from his defeat. Combined with a new and better coach I would write off a Kessler victory ... one thing is for sure Kessler was the one that learned the most on that night in Wales.

 

Don't be surprised if many here had it 116-112...rather than 2 points...:good