Hate On Joe Calzaghe

Should have somehow forced Hopkins not to back out of the deal they had made, I think in 2002?
Jay Larkin who used to be the top guy at Showtime is the source incase you were wondering.

 

Go **** your mother, then your sister, and then lay down and let daddy give it to you, Alabama style :good

If you just want to do insults without reason then go ahead, I'll keep up, no problem. Mongol :good

By the way you totally missed my point. What I said was that Pavlik has shown at a very young age that he's prepared to take risks - something that Calslappy even at age 36 isn't prepared to do. Feel free to counter that argument without childish insults, I could do with a laugh.

 

He won the first 4 rounds as I recall, with a 10-8 in the first. 5 points ahead with 8 rounds to go.....I think he won at least 2-3 more rounds of the remainder. It was close but both Calslappys thought he'd lost, and they were right to think that. Just look at Calslappys face when the decision is announced - he was ****ing amazed, he knew he'd been owned.

 

Jermain Taylor is a better win than 100% of the names on Joe Calzaghe's resume, and Pavlik beat taylor twice. :good

 

Oh right, Hopkins is a ducker and Calslappy isn't?

Yep, that argument holds weight

I can't even be bothered to post a list of the fighters that Calslappy has a record of ducking. Feel free to post all the fighters that Hopkins has ducked and we'll have a kind of contest.

 

Thank **** for that, a voice of reason.

 

I don't disagree with that at all, but at no stage was i talking about anything relating to that. Calzaghe didn't come close to fighting everyone but the simple fact is i was discussing resumes, and at this point Calzaghe's is clearly better.

 

I didn't say Hopkins ducked Joe, Jay Larkin, who used to be the top guy at Showtime said Hopkins pulled out of a deal 24 hrs after it was agreed.
That argument may just hold some weight at I'm quite sure Jay would have no reason to lie.
It's ok, it's late, you can convienently not read the part of my post that stated that and comeback with a pointless suggestion of listing fighters both guys have ducked.
Your debate skills are unrivaled, you win 10 internets.

 

What I was saying is that is a bulll**** point.

Calslappys resume may be better than Pavliks at this moment in time but look at Calslappys at age 26 and compare it to Pavliks right now. You'd find it's a case of shot Eubank V PRIME Taylor. Who's better?

Of course we don't know what's going to happen. If Pavlik takes on shot fighters like Hopkins for the next 10 years like Calslappy did then I promise you I'll bash the guy, but chances are he won't and he gave indication of that by taking on prime Taylor as I said before. Had there been a Taylor like champ at 168 back in the day I guarantee Calslappy would have avoided him.

 

I read that part of your post and I've heard this story many times. All I can do is judge with my own eyes and say that had Hopkins taken that fight back in 2002 he'd have won comfortably. Anyone who saw the Hopkins/Calslappy fight would agree with that. I do accept that Hopkins was a difficult man to deal with back then though, he avoided a Jones rematch like the plague whilst claiming he'd win 2nd time around :nut

I don't believe Hopkins 'ducked' a Jones rematch, and I don't believe Hopkins ducked Calslappy back in 2002 either - he'd just beaten former welterweight Trinidad and in Bernards undeniably delusional mind he deserved a HUGE payday. He was wrong.

 

Because you implied that i was some Calzaghe hugging tool, i'll ask you this, as this is in relation to your original response to my post.

How is Pavlik's resume better than Calzaghe's, compare each resume.

I'll start for you, Taylor is a slightly better win than anyone on Calzaghe's resume (though i wouldn't rate it any higher than Kessler, i could see how you would). Now build the rest of your case, as both of their careers involve more than 1 fighter.

 

Fair enough.

I don't hug or hate either of the fighters, Pavlik is willing to fight anyone and everyone and that is what this sport needs. My original post was just in relation to some of the hype and implications that people make in relation to Pavlik, as though he has done more than Calzaghe already.

 

I think the Kessler/Taylor comparison is fair but I think both guys are ultimately judged on their best fights, so how far down the ladder do you go when comparing resumes? Does it even matter how many C+/B- guys you beat if you are above that level. There is the matter of 'bringing along' which is important but in the long run those victories aren't what you would/should be judged on.

 

Until we get more fights, this is speculation. We need more cross pond bouts.

 

Well the way i look at it is Pavlik has great wins over Taylor, and then two wins over Zuniga and Miranda.

Calzaghe has a great win over Kessler, a solid win over an over the hill but still very challenging Hopkins (i don't feel the result was controversial at all), destroyed Jeff Lacy who was overrated so much it isn't funny but the sheer manner in which he beat him makes it a decent notch on the resume.
And then a **** ton of wins over guys that are on a similar level to Miranda/Zuniga, better in a lot of cases.

Pavlik's shaping up to be a great fighter and if he can destroy Hopkins i will seriously rethink my approach to the comparison, as it will etch a level of consistency in his resume, which atm is the difference between the two.