F***-off

After watching some one of those so called 'stoppages' JC already thin resume gets thinner than a Euro model.

 

The reason Joe is not really appreciated is because its his fault he stayed in Europe fighting nobodies his whole career. He finally got a little bit attention when he beat Lacy but when he cross over to fight B Hop and Roy Jones it was way too late in his career to define his legacy. He fought B Hop and Jones when they way past their primes and retire right after. To be honest he has a lot to prove and he should come back and join the super middle weight tournament to make things very interesting but if he decides to stay retire then you just have to set back and respect the man wishes.

 

Agreed.

 

Any nations players can come and play baseball in the USA. There are no restrictions, and that is the only league in the world that is so.

Thus the world series.


Keith

 

easily 100 better boxers than J.C.

 

They'll always be more respected for one simple reason: They're American, and Calzaghe's not.

Look at Roy Jones's record (* next to the ones who were legitimate great wins):

Beat Hopkins*
Beat Toney*
Beat Lucas
Beat Woods*
Beat Tarver*
Lost to Tarver
Lost to Johnson
Lost to Tarver
Beat Trinidad
Lost to Calzaghe
Lost to Green
Used steroids, dodged everybody, and began losing when he finally stepped up in competition.

Look at Hopkins:

Lost pro debut
Lost to Jones
Beat Johnson*
Beat Trinidad*
Beat De La Hoya
Lost to Taylor
Lost to Taylor
Beat Tarver
Beat Wright
Lost to Calzaghe
Beat Pavlik*

These two legends supposedly "fought the best," but Jones basically fought the second-best, and began to lose as soon as he started fighting real fighters. He has good wins against Tarver, Woods, Toney, and Hopkins.

Hopkins has a ton of names on his record, but when you look more closely you realize that they were all either much smaller than him or way past their primes. Glen Johnson, Felix Trinidad, and Kelly Pavlik are the only great wins he has (and you could easily argue that that one isn't even that great, with Pavlik moving up 10 pounds).

Look at Calzaghe:

Beat Eubank
Beat Lacy*
Beat Bika
Beat Kessler*
Beat Hopkins*
Beat Jones

Lacy, Kessler, and Hopkins are the only great wins he has. (Remember, he was supposed to lose to Lacy.) The interesting thing is that he never lost. Jones and Hopkins lost to much worse fighters than the ones Calzaghe faced. Furthermore, Hopkins is guilty of ducking Calzaghe, and Jones was never interested in the first place. Hard to get those big names if they aren't willing to fight you...

I think as time goes on, we'll see them remembered with Hopkins as the most respected, Calzaghe second, and Jones last.

 

Joe's resume should be better, but the hate on here is way over the top considering what the guy did.

He beat a great, past prime (but so was Joe) but still great Hopkins.

How people can hate on someone for beating someone of Hopkins stature is beyond me. I'm pretty sure if he was American the criticism would still be there but not so vicious.

I'm a firm believer that the Euro vs American thing is getting ridiculous, 90% of Joes hate on here is American based and its sad. A great fighter is a great fighter regardless of colour or creed, and Joe was great.

 

Im a Welshman, and a huge Calzahe fan

RJJ AND HOPKINS WILL ALWAYS BE MORE RESPECTED THAN CALZAGHE

100% CORRECT

RJJ and Hopkins in there primes would hve battered Calzaghe

 

his four notables wins are against lacy, kessler, hopkins and jones.
lacy was always an overhyped fighter, look at his struggles against guys like omar sheka and syd vanderpool

kessler was a better win but what exactly has he accomplished. he was suppose to be the heir apparent to the smw division it hasnt quite happened and he just lost to ward.

nobody can deny the greatness of jones and hopkins but he beat both of those guys past their prime. jones was a damn near corpse by the time he fought him and hopkins, while still a good fighter, was clearly past it. and while he beat both, he didnt prove much ( well maybe against hopkins he did) and he got dropped by both of them.

at the end, his resume is nothing to get excited about

 

I admit Hopkins is in his forties but I think he is a better more complete fighter now than he was in previous years. Ive read alot of comments that Calzaghe wouldnt have beaten a younger version of Hopkins, but which version? The one who lost his debut, the one that lost to Jones in a dull match, the one that got knocked down twice on his 2nd world title attempt and got up to only get a draw, or the one that lost twice to J Taylor. We know Hopkins dosent have a stamina problem from the Pavlik fight, yet Calzaghe had him looking for time out and trying to get points deducted which is often the sign of a fighter who feels hes behind or losing.
Calzaghes resume is thin but I dont think Hopkins would ever have beaten him.
With Jones the man was a performance enhancing cheat. Who when you look at his record of the good MW, SMW & LHW theres not one I see on there that I dont think Calzaghe would have beaten.
Jones 1st fight with Griffin was close and the way he was walked back into corners, if that had of been Calzaghe he would have been throwing fast combos, so against a prime Jones who knows for sure.
Yes Hopkins and Jones will be thought of better than Calzaghe, but could they have beaten Calzaghe earlier in there careers? Im not so sure they could.

 

Really can't understand the huge amount of hate Calzaghe gets. Put it this way, Mayweather beats an undefeated Hatton, then Pacquiao goes and does the same. Pac gets bugger all credit (and rightfully so) for his victory over Hatton, because Floyd had already done the majority of the work, and Floyd takes full respect for beating Hatton, in his prime and undefeated (and rightfully so).

Why is this formula not also used for Calzaghe against Lacy? Lacy was never the same fighter after he was absolutely spanked by Calzaghe, and at the time he was being hailed as the new Tyson.

And could someone possibly articulate exactly why Floyd's 0 is better than Calzaghe's 0? I don't doubt that Floyd is p4p the much better boxer, but there is certainly an indifference of respect when it comes to which nation a boxer originates from.

Additionally, Hopkins was at most, slightly past his prime in his fight with JC. Sorry if this offends anyone, but that's a huge victory for Calzaghe. Hopkins is a brilliant boxer, even now at the age of 44, yet Calzaghe's win is somehow deemed tarnished because people believe Hopkins was past his prime? Calzaghe was too????

I'm no huge fanboy of JC, and personally I prefer Roy Jones' p4p reign over Calzaghe's resume, but people need to give Calzaghe credit for what he achieved, which undeniably, was a lot.

Put it this way, would Calzaghe be getting as much hate if he lost?

Dont think so...

 

hopkins circa 1999-2001 was at his best. people love to point out that hopkins beat pavlik after losing to calzaghe yet dismiss the fact that he already lost to taylor not once but twice prior to to even moving up in weight

 

I have to agree with alot of what you write.
Im not the biggest Calzaghe fan, but feel he gets alot of critism for beating Hopkins yet no one discredits Tarver, Wright or Pavlik for losing to Hopkins.

 

Jones Hopkins ATGs????? REALLY???
What bothers me most is Hopkins and Jones won titles in 1993 and 1994. And didn't fight Calzaghe until 14 and 15 YEARS LATER...WOW!!!:verysad:verysad:verysad Yet they had no problem fighting Steve Frank,Joe Lipsey,William Bo James,Andrew Council,Robert Allen,Syd Vanderpool,Morrade Hakkar,Fermin Chirino,Danny Garcia,Antoine Byrd,Tony Thornton,Merqui Sosa,Bryant Brannon.

 

O.k. do you think the Hopkins of 1999-2001 who was struggling against Antwun Echoles & Robert Allen, and who beat Felix Trinidad who had spent most of his career at WW would have beaten the Calzaghe of that era? I dont. At that time Calzaghe didnt have as many hand problems either and could punch harder also.