Calzaghe would lose in Olympics

:gayfight

 

At least that is a better reply than this...

Well thought out argument you have there X. You really made your point very clear.

 

apparantly jeff lacy agrees.:roll:

 

Calslappy fanboy, huh?

So now you're upset I laughed at a joke?

Seriously, nuthugger or what?

 

But damn he would suited amateurs :yep

 

LOL :rofl

 

:rofl

 

////who is chris cousin:huh

 

Chris Eubank's cousin, by the name of Bobbie Joe Edwards - a bum/journeyman, but had inherited the chin, clearly.

 

Yeah Bobbie Joe had a good chin no doubt, but the real reason he didnt get knocked out was he was a crusier weight. Big bad boy. As for Joe not being able to win in the olympics, dude please............. He was only the second man in history to win three ABA titles in three consecutive years at three differant weights. he would have wasted his opposition whoever it was, he had the highest amatuer pedigree.

 

Exactly my point - people are making out that Calzaghe has always been unable to sit on his shots, when it simply isn't true.

He was an amateur of the highest calibre, and was excluded from the 1992 games because he could no longer make welter and the ABA refused to sanction a box-off.

 

lol JC lost 2 amature fights in his whole life and should have been in the olympics and would have waled away with a medal.

there was a argument over being able to take enzo as his trainer and it was decided not to take JC

oh and 1 on them amature losses his opponents father was the ref

 

Joe is a chump and should have went to the olympics and won nothing. ABA's mean didly squat, face it Joe has no talent as a boxer. atsch

 

Well at the Olympics you HAVE to face the best. Be honest now Calzaghe fans, joe never really wanted to do that until he was 35 years old, and then quickly gave up the policy when he was 36.

 

Calzaghe would be perfectly suited to the amatures. It is all about scoring points, not doing damage.