Could Joe Calzaghe still be undefeated if he fought Roy Jones Jr's opponents?

Calzaghe fans will always have a real problem understanding why Glen Johnson would be an extremely difficult fight for Joe, because the vast majority of them seem to be infatuated with the zero, as well as being a group particularly fond of doing all of their boxing analysis through boxrec stats. Failey is the classic example of this, a guy who hasn't seen any fights but will happily chuck stacks of boxrec stats around as if they prove anything, and so will never understand how effective Johnson was at his peak.

Much like guys like the aforementioned Orlando Salido as well as former featherweight world champion Steve Robinson, Glen Johnson is one of those fighters who had a patchy career before hitting a period and a set of circumstances which saw him have a very, very good career peak indeed.

Boxrec idiots like Katie K or whatever her name is, they see the losses but didn't see the fights and don't see the whole picture. In 2004, Glen Johnson knocked out Roy Jones, beat Antonio Tarver over 12 rounds, and UD'd Clinton Woods in Sheffield. The evidence of how he fought that year and who he beat underlines that, at his best, he was a very good light-heavyweight indeed.

The best lhw version of Calzaghe was extremely fortunate to edge an SD over a tired, toothless, blunted Hopkins, and then failed to stop a significantly worse version of Jones than the one Johnson KO'd with one shot.

2004 Johnson vs 2008 Calzaghe... how can anyone view this as a stroll for Joe? On what basis exactly? We all saw the problems that Johnson can pose for a faster, more mobile boxer when he pushed Chad Dawson all the way in '08, once Johnson was on the decline himself. 2008 Calzaghe did not have the power to keep Johnson off him, no way in hell, so this fight would take place in a phone booth, either that or it'd be Johnson steamrolling forward and Calzaghe shoeshining off the back foot. Either way, this fight points to an extremely competitive battle, with hundreds of punches thrown by both. I'd back Calzaghe to land at slightly higher volume, Johnson to land the harder, more telling punches... This would be razor-thin. The styles/attributes all point to that.

As I said, this would be like Reid-Calzaghe, but Johnson was bigger, heavier and stronger than Reid.

 

Going on your logic then,

Hopkins
Mayweather
Marciano

Have arguably never beaten a HOF class or 'special' fighter in their prime, so are they not special fighters? No, that's rubbish. Of course all three are special fighters.

'earth-shattering things', so is Buster Douglas now an ATG and special fighter because of how he shocked the world?

Your argument and logic here is poor, yes of course those guys are special, and so was Calzaghe, do his achievements match his talent and abilities? No they don't. But anyone who saw him fight can see he was a special fighter

Whether a fighter is special is of course subjective, but on the logic you've provided, you can rip apart a lot of fighters that are considered 'special'.

Onto your Glen Johnson argument, yes it would be a close fight, but having seen plenty of both I can see Joe moving through the gears to take a close but clear decision. I actually think Johnson would win rounds and make it close throughout, he also has a good underrated jab in my opinion. One more point to pick up on, you say Johnson only comes forward, so the fight would take place in a phone booth, that's wrong. Joe could fight on the back foot, and would throw punches and move side to side. There would be some inside fighting, but I don't think Joe would stand in and trade with the bigger and more powerful Johnson, who wouldn't take a backward step against Calzaghe

 

He most likely would still be undefeated, Roy fought mostly sanitation workers and parking attendants.

 

Never mind Jones opponents. If Joe had fought a younger Jones, he would of been defeated. This is why Joe waited as long like he did, to finally cross the water to fight elite or has been elite fighters.

 

I think if Joe had simply offered rematches to fighters who had alegit claim to them, he would have been defeated. Robin Reid was an even match for Joe when he was prime sinc ethey fought a decision that could easily have gone either way,and it was Reid's turn to scrape a disputed decision if they had immediately fought again. Likewise you could see the Kessler fight going the other way on the Dane's home turf, but Kessler was stupid enough not to ask for a rematch clause, he was thick like that.

He didnt need Jones opponents to lose fights, he just needed to be fairer with his own.

I do wish Joe hadnt fought the fortysomething guys as his career pinnacle, it makes his legacy look terrible and cowardly. If he had schooled Pavik and Froch as well then he'd have such a better legacy, thought the question remains whether that would be a bridge too far in his late thirties. I still think that to end on a defeat to Froch or Dawson in 2009 would have been MUCH better than ending on beating up old men (and still looking bad doing it). Calzaghes fear of losing his undefeated status ruined his legacy and will forever make him a weak HOFer.

 

zis ist a stunning post jam packed full of zice cold irrefutbale facts. zie **** gobbler kittikasem has no answer to zis and vill resort to deepthroating zose disgusting tranny queens ze loves so much atsch

 

Other aspect is that Jones and Cal were in different time periods really.

If Joe fought Toney for instance, then toney would be pretty crap by his own standards by then, and near prime Joe would have been able to scrape an ugly decision against the almost fortysomething Toney.

Joe versus prime James is another matter. touch and go either way, but no way does Calzaghe have a chance of makinf Toney look terrible the way oy could with his then superhuman reflexes.

 

:roflatsch @ these single-cell organic blobs who think that Johnson beats Calzaghe.

What ****ing planet are these walnuts on? :nut

 

Stunning scientific post, Professor. Cordial salutations! :happy

 

Heartfelt greetings Professor!

What an honour to receive such high praise from an esteemed scholar and gentleman such as yourself :happy

 

Joe will ALWAYS be RJJ's daddy. Always.

 

I remember people saying how Pavlik was supposed to ruin Joe Calzaghe and look how he got dominated by Hopkins after Calzaghe picked up that win

People keep batting on about how Joe looked bad against an "old" Hopkins but fail to mention Hopkins was able to beat the so white hope in Pavlik and then went onto beat Pascal not to mention beating Tarver at 175 before hand whilst Calzaghe wasnt a spring chicken himself at this point.

Then we get the over rated James Toney who was twice handed a defeat by the hands of Montell Griffin and also Drake ****ing Thadzi! Toney never beat anyone outside Mike Mccalum until he juiced up to get to heavyweight and fought the aging relic that was Holyfield.

Then we go to Tarver who would get completely outworked by Calzaghe, Johnson would have gone down the same road and then your usual run of the mill fighters.

Not to mention the fact that everyone forgets that Jones was caught juicing yet the IBF (We love african americans . . . btw not a racial slur but more of a proven fact) did **** all about it just as they did nothing after Peterson had juiced up lately and has given Zab ****ing Judah a title shot time and time again whilst you have fighters like Mathysse and Olusegen waiting forever for a title shot.

 

Zankyou for zie warm welcome knockout artist. Vie vill meet soon with all zie Team Elite Corportion General to have noble round zie table discussion over a decanter of zie finest Dandelion & Burdock zat money can buy in order to determine zie nominations for zie 3rd annual Team Elite Awards Ceremony.

 

Yet another ****-weak argument about to get taken to the cleaners...

Oh dear. In this fanboy's rush to defend his beloved Joe C, he has forgot to go on boxrec and check his facts, leaving him woefully unprepared for citing specific examples.

Hopkins not only has beaten a prime HOF-calibre fighter, he has also achieved something I consider thoroughly earth-shattering (perhaps he even has more than one such achievement, could be debated).

Hopkins dominated and stopped Tito Trinidad when Tito was 40-0(34), p4p#2 in the world, and a 3-weight world champion. Some would not consider this such a great win because Tito was not a natural mw, but I am not one of those people, as Tito's extreme dominance of big natural lmw champion Fernando Vargas and of world mw champion William Joppy proved to me that he was legitimate fighting bigger guys. Also, Tito wasn't even small for a mw anyway, his frame and dimensions were perfectly acceptable for fighting there, much like Sergio Martinez is now.

Also, you should be committed to an asylum at speed if you do not consider THE oldest man to ever win a major world title someone who has achieved something earth-shattering!! And as I alluded to earlier, some would also consider the only man of the alphabelt age (as far as I know) to repeatedly defend all four major world titles as an undisputed division champion to be an earth-shattering achievement, as when else has it been done? But this one is more debatable, whereas taking the world championship off Pascal at 46 is not.

I consider Floyd Mayweather a special fighter even though he hasn't beaten any prime HOF-class fighters because I consider his achievements pretty colossal; they outstrip Calzaghe's. Mayweather has won world titles in 5 divisions, and (to me, more impressively) is still operating at the highest level with success a staggering 14 years (and counting) since he first won a world title in 1998. Also, I should have added a caveat to my original criteria to say that a unique skillset is also of importance when considering someone a 'special fighter'. Mayweather is a once in a generation stylist, with wonderful technique. This also contributes to his 'special' status. Again, in my eyes, Calzaghe does not register here. He was most certainly not a 'special' fighter in terms of skills and ability, this is my opinion.

Rocky Marciano is not a fighter I have a great deal of regard for, personally speaking. I wouldn't argue with anyone who thought differently as a dominant heavyweight reign is not something to sniff at, but he's not someone I'm overly enthusiastic about. I do rate him because he twice defeated the guy I believe is the 5th greatest fighter of all-time p4p (Charles) and because he twice defeated the guy I believe had one of the very very best ever heavyweight skillsets (Walcott), but his thin resume is not one I get excited about personally. I do rate him higher than Joe Calzaghe though, because Calzaghe never beat anyone anywhere remotely near the pedigree of Charles nor decisively beat anyone with anything like the skillset and experience of Walcott.

Buster Douglas achieved one of the very best wins in history IMO, but one fight does not make you a special fighter. I consider Benitez special for the achievement of winning the world title at 17 because that isn't just winning 1 fight, it's winning 1 fight with a special set of circumstances attached. To win a world title as a 17 year old boy is crazy, to me that's a different animal to just achieving a great win at some point in your career. JMHO.

A laughable accusation coming from someone who just made a complete tit of himself by citing Hopkins as an example of a fighter who never achieved anything earth-shattering, when he currently stands aloft as the oldest world champion in boxing history!! (in addition to fulfilling the criteria of having beaten a prime HOF class fighter as well!)

In your opinion, yes. In mine, no. I am not interested in convincing you that Calzaghe was not a special fighter, so I have no idea why you want to convince me so badly that he is. Odd. By my own estimations, Calzaghe was a very good fighter, but fell some way short of being 'special', and I have provided explanation for this.

Bear in mind, my post was a reaction to someone saying that to not consider Calzaghe special was "blind hatred" - an utterly, utterly ridiculous statement.

To not consider Sugar Ray Robinson special - this would constitute someone being so blindly irrational that you would suspect hatred or some other morbid motive.

Calzaghe? Please. Obviously his 'special' status is nowhere near so indisputable.

Er, yes, they do. In fact, his achievements exceed and flatter his talent and abilities. Calzaghe is one of the greatest career-strategizers of all-time. His major career achievement (long-time undefeated record) was only permitted by his careful risk-weighing, cherrypicking, and career-strategizing. If Calzaghe had fought prime Jones or Hopkins, or treaded a more challenging career path throughout, he would have incurred losses, and so his paper achievements would now be poorer. Calzaghe was a fighter with glaring technical deficiencies, who compensated for this by relying on his physical strengths such as workrate, handspeed, and decent whiskers. This was enough to get him by against the succession of poor opposition he fought throughout his world title reign, but would have seen him sorely exposed by a technician like a prime Hopkins (free of stamina issues) or a genuine elite like a prime Jones.

Seriously?

I've seen every one of his world title fights, and a few of his fights before he became a world champ. I don't see how anyone can consider him a special fighter ability-wise, unless they prize fast hands and a high tempo above all else.

It appears we have very, very different notions of what boxing skills and technique are.

Which makes it all the more odd that you have chosen to get all riled up by someone saying Joe C isn't special.

Which makes it all the more odd that you have chosen to attack me when my post was in riposte to someone who said that anyone disagreeing with him over who was special was guilty of "blind hatred". :nut

I see no need for everyone to conform to thinking all of the same fighters are special. I have my criteria, I have thought it out, and I believe in it. I am most certainly not going to alter it because of your indignation.

You and I have radically different ideas of what great achievements are and of what boxing skills/ability is, so I very much doubt we would consider the same fighters 'special'.

You are presenting what I think would happen as if it was contrary to my opinion. Have I said anything on this thread that makes you think I don't agree with the above? I think it would be a very close, very competitive fight. I haven't said anywhere that Johnson would beat Calzaghe.

You have failed pretty dismally to adequately refute even one point I've made thus far, but by all means, squeeze in one more go!!

Hmmm...


Did I say that? :think

Sorry pal, you failed your reading comprehension test. Go to the back of the class next to Failey and Prof I C Chins. atsch

Consider yourself thoroughly, thoroughly schooled.


But enjoy your congratulations from funny Prof I C Chins, all the other trolls do. :smoke