China_hand_Joe's education of the classic forum thread.

:huh What you are saying is that you are incapable of doing what you claimed you were going to do.:yep

Absolutely classic!:rofl

 

This content is protected

 

Like Greb, they arrived on the scene before humans had evolved arms and more than one leg.

 

From a purely mathematical point of view I find it quite interesting that if you chose to resurrect this "dire monstrosity" that you created you would begin with Maxim's awfulness.

That same Maxim that boxrec with its purely objective mathematical rating systems says is the #9 light heavyweight that ever lived.

http://www.boxrec.com/ratings.php?co...us=E&SUBMIT=Go

At some point an objective scientific investigator would have to assume that his entire theoretical framework is flawed when having HAND PICKED the example then having set the conditions upon which proof was to be determined and delivered he was unable to do so after being given exactly the data requested.

The logical and objectively correct thing to do is admit that 1.) E. Charles is indeed one of if not THE G.O.A.T. at Light Heavy and 2.) There is merit to the arguments of the posters in the classics section when it comes to evaluations of fighters in different eras, in fact they have proved their case time and time again with logic, statistics, reasoned analogy based on personal experience and the dutifully recorded first hand observations of eye witnesses that would be qualified as EXPERTS in a court of law.

Which I think leads us to 3.) That in fact emotional content was the primary motivation for this thread.

I take nothing away from Joe Calzaghe and wish him the best in his upcoming encounter. At the end of his career - when he is retired for good and all, only then will the classic section truly begin to be able to evaluate him and his accomplishments. Inclusion into the elite company that includes E. Charles a Candidate for the G.O.A.T. in his weight class might yet be possible for him.

 

Except that the (entertaining) character/sock puppet known as China_hand_Joe ascribes to Calzaghe's greatness as the first article of faith. It's the one "fact" that he starts with in his experimental framework. Thus, if the framework doesn't yield the answer he's looking for, he must revise the framework rather than the idea of Calzaghe's greatness.. What he's fishing for is a way of viewing the world that makes Calzaghe the greatest fighter ever.

He will be looking for a long, long time.

 

With respect, sir, I certainly do not disagree...


With his 43 wins and 32 Ko's I estimate he has accomplished roughly half what Carlos Monzon did with his 87 wins and 59 Ko's although Joe did it against weaker opposition.

But Joe is still active and I have hope he can improve his record and his quality of opposition - Joe C. may yet accomplish something of note in boxing if he goes on a run like Jack Dempsey did with (17?)first round KO's or lasts as long as Archie Moore did (fighting contenders in 4 decades) or finds himself a worthy man to have as a nemisis in a legendary trilogy like Graziano and Zale or gather belts in 6 divisions or - well I think you get my drift :happy

 

Mostly good lists, but this one seemed starkly unfair...

Why would Johnson, Marshall, Williams and Bivins count on Walcott's, Burley's and Charles' lists, but not on Moore's? I would certainly think those guys should rank as high as Maxim- especially Johnson, who was pretty clearly a cut above Maxim's level, in my opinion. Moore was 4-1 against Johnson, 2-0 against Marshall, 1-1 against Williams, and 4-1 against Bivins.

 

All right, I haven't been on here much lately, but scanning back through the earlier pages of this thread, I find myself a little confused...

I see about three one-sentence posts which have nothing to do with the Charles'-record-against-best-opponents thing in between here. Did you not promise to explain how Charles' record winning three of every four fights against Hall-of-Fame championship-level opponents from middleweight to heavyweight for over a decade was somehow un-special and unimpressive?

 

Haha...I can't believe you guys are falling for this. I'll bet CHJ's analysis comes back something like:

"And the evidence shows 94% of ESBers have no life and will go on fool's errands just b/c someone tells them..."

 

Cal is the guy who dodged Ottka by offering him 1/3 of a purse for lots less than he made fighting in germany. Think he offered Ottka DM500,000 when Ottka was making Dm 2,000,000 in Germany vs anyone.
Cal is the guy who beat an out of shape old Eubank, and Mitchel the guy Ottka beat for his title...and Lacy.....cant forget Lacy, even if everyone else has...what ever happened to Lacy any way?
Charles was a much better fighter, and Cal would get docked points for slapping against the rules even back against Charles.....