Calzaghe went 10 years (97-06) without a big fight...WHY??

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by Zain786, Aug 9, 2009.


  1. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    No they're opinions.... why don't you address my post above regarding his opposition? And Kessler is nowhere near p4p number one in the world. He can't left hook. He can't change pace. He's a flawed fighter.
     
  2. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    Bump

    Someone discredit this post without claiming that i'm jealous of Calzaghes success or biased against people taller then 5 ft 10 etc etc.

    TFFP what have you got? :rofl
     
  3. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    Uncle Calzaghe (HOF) where are you? :)
     
  4. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Joe was supposed to have taken part in Don Kings middleweight tourney (Hopkins, Simon, Tito etc). He refused. Joe was slated to have fought Johnson twice. He pulled out both times. He was supposed to fight Telesco and Tate. Tate retired and Joe fought Tocker Pudwill instead. Joe said he couldnt make 68 anymore and hence why he was to face Telesco. Joe had no interest in 75 and instead stayed at 68 and fought Miguel Jiminez instead. Joe was supposed to fight Joppy to raise his US profile that went by the way. Joe was going to fight Eastman that never happened. By the time he faced Lacy Lacy demanded a down payment of £1M because Joe had pulled out of soo many bouts. Joe wouldnt face Ottke apparently he was afraid of flying. Managed to find his ass in the US twice though didnt he. Money tends to get rid of flying phobia's... Hopkins Joe never happened when it mattered and the popular excuse is Hopkins wanted double the money. Thats the excuse SN paraded through the news.. Hmmm really?!?!:roll:

    By the time he did face Hopkins and Jones the bouts never mattered. Joe had no interest in unifcation and said so himself. When Ottke was ranked number 1 the division was a wasteland with the WBC WBA and IBF changing hands on a regular basis. There was a bunch of US guys like Butler Echols or Grant (Mundine) all US journeymen that could have raised his profile but Joe wouldnt travel abroad. Instead he ended up on the undercard of the Mike Tyson Nielsen bill in Scandinavia somewhere beating up Kid "Ceasefire" Mcyntrye. That bout was soooo ****ing bad that even Joe implored the ref to step in.

    Joe was the most pig headed and obstinate ***** to negociate with and only made the big bouts in the end because of the money he stood to make. He was fantastically talented and could have achieved so much more but much like he's dad he's a twisted deluded prat with a god complex. As much as people want to blame Warren Joe was by far the bigger problem. Warren doesnt give any of his fighters the "push" unless they want it. Even when Joe was to face Lacy last minute he wanted to scupper the bout.

    Joe reminded me alot of Steve Roberts. He only boxed because thats how he made his living. Then after the sport rewards him so well over a 15 year or so opportunistic span Joe then puts the boot in just like Ricky Fatton and bleats about boxing is dying. Well you contributed handsomely to its downfall Joe. Never ever bite the hand that feeds you.
     
  5. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    Oh and i missed off Pudwill- someones made him a tribute.

    [YT]dSaCxb7Ewg8&feature=related[/YT]
     
  6. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    But was he that talented... the fights that passed as world class match ups

    Bika- poor performance
    Lacy- great performance but in hindsight a windmill against a punchbag.
    Kessler- close fight, Kessler looks good but he's over hyped and yet to prove himself as anything special.
    Hopkins- on the deck and scrapes through
     
  7. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    You cant. You know why because i spent the whole of the 90's and early 2000's immersed in boxing. Id write into Boxing news and collect every magazine and article in site. I was at the fights or either at home watching Friday fight night. Iv watched Joe's career from front to back and every word you speak is the truth as thats exactly how i rememeber it. Apart from Ricky iv not seen a more marketed or opportunistic career.
     
  8. China_hand_Joe

    China_hand_Joe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,217
    12
    Sep 21, 2006
    Highlighted fighters would have added more or less nothing to Calzaghe resume - same type of padding as Veit and all.

    His resume could have been slightly better, maybe some paper champion like Woods would have faced him at LHW.

    All Calzaghe could have done to boost his resume significantly was a proper fight instead of Jones in his last fight. but Calzaghe was ready to quit.

    Most poorly marketed, unhyped ever, all due to bad luck. :(
     
  9. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    CHJ... no beef with you pal... We don't argue much about this but had Calzaghe beaten Henry Wharton instead of Robin Reid doing it.... had he been the man to beat Clinton Woods... Had he taken Keith Holmes..... etc etc... to say these names would have added nothing is utter ****.

    These names are/were good fighters in there day, yes they got beat eventually- everyone who fights challenging opposition usually does but they were world class, live opponents in there primes and these fights could have been made.

    Your been utterly short sighted with regards to Calzaghes career. The more I investigate and remember the divsions the way they were the more I come up with the theory that Calzaghe is a fraud. He's certainly not a legend.

    If Hamed had of avoided Barrera and waited till he'd been stiffed by Pacman then beat him- plus added on a handful of meaningless defences he would have surpassed everything Calzaghe did in his career.

    Calzaghe was not as good as you think.
     
  10. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    Scurla I'm a hatton fan for life but are we just that thick we can't see Calzaghe's brilliance :lol:

    I'm worried.
     
  11. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Joe had two great attriubutes that good boxers need. A sound beard and a punch. Albeit his punching technique was woeful to watch. Matter of fact it was downright abysmal. BUT it got the job done. As for his performances iv never been enamaoured by any of them including the Lacy bout. Joe wasnt my cup of tea and he looked even worse when show boating.
     
  12. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    I've made my mind up. Calzaghe was a fantastic belt holder but no legend. And by fantastic I mean consistant. And very fit.
     
  13. China_hand_Joe

    China_hand_Joe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,217
    12
    Sep 21, 2006

    The different between Hamed and Calzaghe is, Calzaghe would have beaten all his peers but lacked the charisma to get the matches. Only Roy Jones had a greater than 20% chance of beating Calzaghe.
     
  14. brown bomber

    brown bomber 2010 Poster of the Year Full Member

    30,856
    17
    Jul 1, 2006
    :lol:

    Lets leave this debate here shall we.
     
  15. Gaz S

    Gaz S Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,766
    0
    Aug 20, 2005
    Welcome back Jeff. For a while recently it looked you were almost tempted into the darkness.... but glad to see you've got your senses back now!

    Calzaghe was a very good fighter, fact. Sometimes a sloppy, unattractive one, but very effective and capable with many good attributes (when he wasn't throwing illegal punches).

    However his "greatness" is indeed a load of smoke and mirrors. You made a fantastic comprehensive list there of potential opponents for Joe since 1997 or so, and it would be plain ignorant or naieve for anyone to believe absolutely NONE of those fights happened because nobody wanted any part of Joe, blah, blah, blah. That's bull****. All we hear is excuses - one sided excuses made by Calzaghe/ Warren (oh, and Warren claims Joe pulled out of fights no less than 12 times whilst he was promoting him).

    It's just a fairy story. I respect Joe, but he has wasted a career and proven very little. In my eyes the only meritful win that could possibly mean something is Kessler, depending on what happens in Kessler's career from here in.
    I felt Hopkins beat him, Jones doesn't even count now, Lacy was a huge disappointment and has since looked worse and worse, Eubank was a late sub, weight drained and faded...
    Woodhall, Brewer and Mitchell are good wins, but not ATG worthy and Reid was a good win at the time, though many are of the opinion Joe lost that (for the record, I thought Joe nicked it at the time).

    I don't wish to discredit Joe Calzaghe per sé, but rather the "legendary" status he seems to have acquired.
    Naseem Hamed achieved far much more in his career yet is often debunked or labelled a "fraud". I personally rate Hamed above Joe in terms of status. Whilst Naz had a long WBO reign, at least he beat all the other rival champions when it mattered, took himself overseas to prove himself against quality American opposition and didn't wait until everybody else had become just relics before wanting to fight them. I actually think more of Naz's loss to Barrera than I do of Joe's win over Jones. At least Barrera was prime and a legit threat, and not a unanimously agreed ghost of Roy Jones.