Calzaghe

it is harder for a european fighter to get creidt than an american based fighter.

lewis took years and years to get it.

calzaghe is getting it now

but i will compare.


i will use donald curry as my example as i saw all his title fights and career develop.

he beat a korean called hwang to win the 147 title.

then defended it v marlon starling a fighter he had already beaten.

then a couple of tocker pudwells iinflated records v journeymen


colin jones -to be fair he travelled to the uk for that then a few more no names then milton mccory.

on the back of this curry was ranked number 1 p4p in the world and a definate all time great at that particular point in time with this resume.

there are different standards when it comes to being ranked by the ring.

 

This bum word is starting to get on my ****ing nerves. A fighter has just died today you ****ing idiot. No fighter, and i mean NONE of them are bums. They put their lives on the line for our entertainment and it takes serious balls to even step through the ropes, amatuer or pro.

I really wish some people would show these fighters a bit more credit.

 

:|

You're always calling fighters bums you ****ing idiot. What have you ever done in the world of boxing, amatuer or pro? I bet the answer is ****all.

Im done with your ****** arse anyway, so don't bother replying. I got my point across.

 

In twenty two consecutive championship bouts, he's been successful against three undefeateds, nine fighters with ONE loss, and Five fighters with TWO losses.


And those twenty two opponents have a combined record of 627-46-9
(that works out to be a rounded average of 29-2-0),

Against these opponents, Joe is 22-0-0 with 11 KOs in title fights.

Before capturing the title, he was 22-0-0 with 21 KOs.

No, it wouldn't be huge. It would be a meaningless, one-sided beatdown of a once-great middlewt, past his prime.
Joe should be going after Dawson.

Have you just started following the sport a short time ago ?

Read this article and see how Lacy was viewed PRIOR to his schooling by Calzaghe:

http://www.thesweetscience.com/boxing-article/3430/lacy-calzaghe-fight-predictions/

Thirteen boxing writers.

Twelve picked Lacy, eight of them by brutal KO.

It's easy to say he was nothing AFTER Calzaghe MADE him nothing.

No-one was saying that BEFORE he faced Calzaghe.

"no longer" is the key phrase here. He has been tamed by a brutal beatdown.

 

Eubank, Reid, Woodhall, Sheika, Veit, Brewer, Mitchell, Lacy, Bika, Kessler.

What a junkie resume....

Aside from Reid, all were destroyed or badly outclassed on top of it, making the wins have more significance.

Compare to Hopkins -

Echols, Joppy, Trinidad, Winky, Tarver, De La Hoya, Holmes...

Adding in losses to Taylor(got shafted, but were close, which looks bad) and a competitive loss to a prime RJJ(which to me is as good as a win over someone very good).

Very comparable, yet Joe is still undefeated.

 

Dawson's got to raise his profile up in the course of the next year if he wants a fight with Calzaghe. He's skilled, but until he brings more name recognition and more $$ to the table, it's not going to happen.

From the other side of the table, I'm not sure how much Dawson would want to pursue it, either. Why risk getting everything derailed by fighting Joe when you're this young, already have a belt, and the division will basically be yours once Hopkins and Calzaghe retire?

 

There's truth to the fact that if Dawson wants Joe C he should raise his profile....but pretty much the situation I saw with Hopkins and Joe C from about 5 years ago.

 

He didn't look bad, it's like people can't see for themselves how a guy is performing. The reason that it evens out that Eubank was a great win despite being past it is that Joe was very green and inexperienced.

Kind of like how Hopkins was past it vs. Taylor but Taylor being inexperienced, thus Taylor making it so close such a negative against Hopkins whether or not anybody differs in opinion of who they think won those two fights, my choice being Hopkins of course.

 

Well, you simply don't even know what you are talking about.

A prime Kessler is a better win than any of Hopkins' wins and a better win than a 40's version of Hopkins. At this point, Hopkins has little to no chance vs. any competent natural MW-LHW, thus bringing your prediction of a Hopkins UD as laughable.

Also, I am a long time Calzaghe fan that will not hold anything against someone giving an opposing objective analysis against Joe, something that nobody does currently. I feel that Calzaghe is 'the best' of the generation, not the best resume, but the best fighter post-RJJ, I don't have anything against someone having a different choice, most commonly Floyd Mayweather, who holds a better resume.

 

How exactly is Kessler a better win then any of Hopkins Amsterdam? Because you say so? That does seem to be the basis of a majority of your posts.

Kessler isn't even CLOSE to being as highly regarded as Tito was. And you can bring your faulty "Tito wasn't P4P @ 160" argument if you want to, but I think we all know that doesn't carry water. Of couse, you can take comfort in the fact that Kessler would whup Tito. Badley. And hey, Kessler would have whupped Azumah Nelson as well.

Kessler is very good, but I don't think he is yet to be regarded as some Elite or P4P fighter because he fights in a limited or unknown division void of major talent. Gppd fighters, but nothing to write home about.

Kessler's thrashing of Andrade isn't typical or Kessler, but more of the exception from what I've seen. Very good, but he falls into a 1-2 lull to comfortably it looks. When your 1-2 isn't scoring, you need a back up plan.

 

But I'm just a hater...ask everyone.

 

I'll bet you a pile of money on Joe against any LHW mate, not just a shot Hopkins. I wouldn't expect you to pay up though, have to respond to Lance's ignorant post though, be right back.