That was to add a bit of authenticity, but any self-respecting Calzaghe hater that would want to make up such a quote should have included an at the end of the day, preferably at the beginning and end of said quote.
i dont know if he said it , but that doesnt mean he couldnt have. Calzaghe has a lot of respect for Jones now, and if this was 2003 then he couldve said it
I don't think this matters... what bugs me is this prime vs prime and the time shift scenarios people keep thinking of. A 38 yr old Hopkins vs a 36 yr old Joe I'll be interested to see how Joe looks in the Jones fight and if the speed is there. Hopkins makes everyone look bad, so you never got to see JC let his hands go. He does diss Jones in his book in relation to the perf enhancers so this cancels any nut hugging he may have done ;-)
Where'd you get that quote? Curious. Also, I find it curious that he's comparing a shot Michalczewski's performance against a prime Hall (who Michalczewski beat twice) to a prime Jone's performance against him. It might make more sense to compare their fights against a prime Griffin, when all 3 fighters were in their prime. Michalczewksi has an edge there.
yea i dont fink those are calzaghes words i mean like TFFP sed theres no "at the end of the day" and "am i bothered?, cause i'm not bothered" and "bullocks" in there
Someone posted it on here a while back. I forget who. I lifted it for a thread I made in the Brit Forum.
Sounds made up to me. At that point, Roy hadn't lost to Tarver yet and was still a high attraction Calzaghe was likely gunning for. It just doesn't sound like something he'd say at the time.