Hopkins: 19 defences, considered the undisputed, linear,no.1 champion at middleweight. a younger, hungry, tall, (fully fledged!!) middleweight rose thru the ranks to become the no.1 contender to his throne. jermain taylor. they fought twice, both times taylor winning close decisions. Calzaghe: 20 defences, considered the linear, no.1 champion at super middleweight. a younger, hungry, taller, fully fledged super middleweight (double world champion) rose to become the no.1 contender to his throne.They fought once and calzaghe won by clear unanamous decision. when comparing the two challengers: taylor and kessler, you would find people are split in deciding who is the better fighter and challenger. i believe kessler. another difference was that kessler was a double world champion in his own right making him a more dangerous oponnent than taylor to hopkins. The day the two fighters met a legit contender to their thrones was the day the two were seperated. calzaghe dealt with his, whereas hopkins found it a hard task, whether you believe he won or lost. this is a different twist on the so called resume talks about hopkins and calzaghe. this is a fair comparison and contrast where both men were late in their careers, had made 19/20 defences, and facing a legit challenger to their number 1 status in their respective weight divisions.
Comparing Hopkins' reign at MW and Calzaghe's reign at SMW on an even keel is a major blunder. Until he fought Kessler, Calzaghe was not linear or undisputed champion. Hopkins was undisputed champion with all of the major belts for about four years when he fought Jermain Taylor. you say "The day the two fighters met a legit contender to their thrones was the day the two were seperated." Well i say Calzaghe never had the throne until he faced Kessler, and that after he took the throne, he never met a legit contender to it.
The difference is that Hopkins beat everybody with any kind of claim to the middleweight crown in the 10 year period he was champion, meaning you can say and mean he was THE Middleweight Champion for 10 years with 20 defenses because there was no linear champion after Ray Leonard, Hopkins picked up all the belts and beat everyone that mattered at 160lbs from '95 to '05. Calzaghe on the other hand, had Svenn Ottke in his division defending a belt 20 times as well. There was no linear champ at 168lbs, and Calzaghe did not unify his belt with another or beat a man recogonized by most in the world as a fellow top 3 at the weight until he wiped the floor with Lacy, thus becoming THE Undisputed Supermiddleweight king. However, Ottke is still a looming presence because you can not say that Calzaghe was THE champion of his division the same years that Ottke had a belt, just as you can not say Ottke was THE champion of the division. Calzaghe has 20 WBO defenses, but he did not become the true, undisputed champion until Lacy, Hopkins' wins over all of the top middleweights of that 10 years stretch, meaning he missed no one at the weight, means that he was THE champion of his division the moment he picked up his first title. Hopkins can be called THE Middleweight Champion who reigned for 10 years and made 20 defenses. Calzaghe made 20 defenses of the WBO belt, but only 3 of them can count as defenses of the true Supermiddleweight crown, of which Calzaghe won when he unified 2 belts with Lacy. Apart from this, Hopkins' overall resume, even the lower-rated wins, are better than Calzaghe's. Two great fighters, two excellent champions, two future hall-of-famers. The difference is that Hopkins fought the better comp., had the more impressive reign, and as a whole generally defeated his challenger in more dominant fashion than did Calzaghe.
Everyone on the planet knew that Calzaghe, Kessler, and Lacy were the top 3 at SMW at the time. All were unbeaten, all had a belt. Clazaghe fights Lacy and wipes the floor with him, he's the undisputed champion. They were arguablly the top two guys at the weight at the time (we know Kessler was better now) and Calzaghe destroyed him. He became the true champion that night. I'm not a huge Calzaghe fan, in most of the threads about him I tend to lean towards the negative side of him, but you can not deny that the man became the legit champ at 168lbs when he wrecked Lacy.
sorry but no dice. When Calzaghe beat Lacy there were 4 title holders. Calzaghe, Lacy, Kessler, and Beyer. Beyer fought Sheika 9 months after Lacy did and beat him more convincingly. KEssler beat Beyer worse than Calzaghe did Lacy. Not saying that Beyer was better than Lacy but Lacy's record was very padded and he got alot of undeserved hype in the US. I had actually heard more of Beyer than Lacy when Calzaghe beat him. So no, Calzaghe did not become undisputed SMW champ when he beat Lacy, by any unbiased standards. I would even venture to say that even most Brits did not consider Calzaghe undisputed until he beat Kessler, it was the americans who did.
actually calzaghe was the no.1 and linear champ. he had the wbo and gave up the ibf and had the ring mag belt. plus 20 defences. he was the universally recognised no.1 in the division. your the only person who thought otherwise. and i was comparing the one fight that i pointed out. not their whole reigns just the one big defences against taylor and kessler.
again, people are miss-interpretating what im trying to do. im analysing their two biggest defences at the weight. taylor and kessler and how they both dealt with those younger unbeaten contenders. the biggest challenges of their reign was taylor and kessler. forget about tito and oscar and eastman etc. these two fights were so similar and parrallel and there were two different outcomes.
he did, 20 defences, unified two belts and won the ring mag belt.at the time of the lacy fight kessler had 1 belt and 2 defences and the best name on his record was a UD over mundine who ottke managed to KO. so how do you give kesssler a claim against a 2 belt champ with the ring belt and like 18 defences???
He was No. 1 and linear champ after beating Kessler, not before that fight. :yep :yep :yep He defended the stupid WBO belt 17 times. Thats a joke, not a record!
lol, i just realised your from germany! you dont count in this thread as your bound to have an opinion on ottke that dis-agrees with the rest of the world. and he had 20 defences up until kessler so just shut it. he was the no.1 supermiddleweight at the time! even if he ****ing wasnt the rest still counts toss.
Look at Hopkins facing every Mandatory, after unifying the 3 (!!!) major belts. Calzaghe won the WBO belt in 1997, when nobody even knew what the WBO belt was.
Ottke won his fights, with a hit-and-run tactic. Do you think i like **** like that? His trainer always shouted at him, before the 12 the round: Come on sven, you must run away now. You have have to act as if you were punching! Thats a fact. Even most of the germans hate Ottke, because he is an a...hole in and much moore outside the ring.