Calzaghe's opponents average age for 2008

I would love to know why dawson would beat joe,
Yes he may have more power than joe, But joe has better stamina, handspeed, movement, better overall skill,
When you look at it like this,
He would beat dawnson, He would anyway.
Just because he beat a washed up tarver and his undefeated does not make him great,
Joe has had a far more better career than dawson at this point,
And finding people saying he would lose to dawson is simply an idiotic comment.

 

hopkins is a really good win for calzaghe especially after hopkins demolition of pavlik after. jones is just an exhibition match for money and will do just a little for joe's legacy.

 

nuffin wrong with fighting that version of Hopkins
but fighting that version 39 year old RJJ, RJJ was really shot

 

The roy jones fight does nothing for his legacy for anyone that has followed jones as of late. The hopkins fight is debatable calzaghe slapped the whole fight he looked like a windmill energizer bunny in that fight not to mention it was contriversal I thought hopkins won based on the only clean punches landed in the fight, activity won it for joe. calzaghes most impressive fight to me is still jeff lacy he totally outclassed a young in his prime champion in that fight (so did taylor though). If calzaghe stays and figths dawson and wins impressively then no one will be able to deny he is a great fighter, he to me is kind of like mayweather though he still has work to do. No one questions great fighters reseme's like holyfield, ali, lewis, delahoya, hopkins, mosley, just to name a few becasue they fought everyone.

 

wats his opponents average age throughout his entire career ???

 

Quality response. :good I've got a little twist to add to it. Let's pretend that, for a second, we could create a fighter who'd be as old as the age differences between their opponents and Calzaghe, Pavlik, and Dawson- just add the ages of their 2008 opponents, and subtract the fighter's age. What you'd have left would be the "age" of the made-up one.

Calzaghe's fighter would be 9 years old.

Pavlik's would be 18.

Dawson's would be 27, or in fact, older than Chad actually was himself.

 

you do realise that calzaghe is 36??

dumb ****

 

Dawson/Calzaghe would be a toss up... Dawson's height, reach and speed could be the difference....

 

This is officially the most ******ed thread ive ever read.

 

Hopkins is not your average 43 year old, as he can still perform at a high level.

Jones, however, was badly, badly declined and hadn't done anything impressive of note in the ring since 2003.

 

Slapzague+Old Timers=ATG:rasta :nut :rofl

 

Dawson might be able to beat Joe but I dont think anyone else in the division can. Not yet anyway.

 

2008 Fights

Age and Age difference comparison of opponents.

Clazaghe and Dawson.

This content is protected

This content is protected

So it would appear that the gap between Dawson's age and that of his opponents is almost three times Calzaghe's.


.

 

Well it's not quite as impressive as all time title defenses by anyone in any division ever 23. When going for legacy at the end you have to go for the biggest names that's what Cal always planned to do irregardless(I suppose something could come up to disuade) ,you can't fight fighters an take the chance they might later lose an damage their reputation.:happy

 

Yeah, good call. The Dawson fight would be a tough one for sure. Hope it comes off.