The no-doubt admirable career of Joe Calzaghe has for me become a little over-hyped and over-rated since his retirement. I can forgive people talking as though Joe beat Hopkins and Jones in 1998 rather than 2008, but the hype around the Lacy win is too much. Simply put, it's spoken about as some huge upset, an upset along the lines of Nigel Benn beating the awesome 160 pound champion Gerald McClellan. Bookies rarely get it wrong, and the fact is the odds-makers couldn't split Calzaghe and Lacy by fight night, probably due to the fact that Lacy just hadn't carried his one punch power to world level. Rewind eleven years, and the biggest puncher in the sport travelling to face Nigel Benn. McClellan not only carried his power to world standard, but was bombing ALL his title challengers out at 160 inside one round. Gerald was 1-3 favourite. With the help of an insane amount of courage bordering on fanatical, and a completely inept referee, Nigel pulled off one of the biggest upsets in British boxing history, in what is still THE best fight I've ever seen. Comparing Calzaghe vs Lacy to Benn vs McClellan is historically insulting.
The Lacy win is regularly compared to Benn's win over the G-Man in the annals of British wins against elite opposition. Sarcastic little replies notwithstanding sir.
I wasn't aware that is how the British press view Lacy/Calzaghe. Yes, I agree with you Benn beating McClellan was way, way more surprising and significant. McClellan was a monster and Benn had showed a weak chin at times. I thought McClellan would 100 percent chance beat Benn.
Only a hand full of fights at that weight can be compared to Benn vs McClellan. It was one of the most brutal fights the last 20-25 yrs. And the fact Benn was the last man standing speaks volumes to the courage he showed that night. I didn't think much of Benn until that fight. Nothing Calzaghe or Lacy ever did in the boxing ring can compare.
