Listen Im not a pac hater I love the guys fights, but many have been saying pac is p4p number one after this fight, and yet joe who I also love to watch boxing is derided for his victories over guys supposedly finished and old men. Why is it one rule for one boxer and an etirely different one for another boxer? Pac and Joe are the bst around right now and are rightfully at the top of the rankings, but I wish people would be consistant in their criticism. Examples: Joe gets hammered for his victory over lacy, because lacy apparently wasnt any good, despite the fact most of american boxing fans thought he would kick calzaghes ass. Yet Bhop fights an ordinary one dimensional boxer in pavlik and gets plaudits for beating a GREAT fighter lol Joe then gets taunted for not coming to usa and fighting ATG fighters and top ranked fighters, so he comes over beats the ring belt champion in his own back yard and then gets taunts of he only beat an old man in bhop who lets not forget beat most of the top americans comfortably even recently. Yet Dawson beats an old johnson and gets described as the best light heavy etc Surely he beat an old man didnt he?? So I just wish there was consistency thats all. Ill admit i have been frustrated at the management early in calzaghes career by frank warren. Calzaghe was good enough to come over to the us a long time ago and fight the top us fighters, but warren at the time wanted full stadiums over here and bigger audiences hence more ££££s for his back pocket. I really think calzaghe is frustrated knowing he could have achived this status he has now years ago. And thats why he has promoted himself recently, you only have to see the way warren has handled amir khan recently to know the guy is not the best. Ill say right now that I dont know if joe could have or would have beaten roy jones, bhop etc in their primes, but one things for sure he would have been in with a hell of a chance with any of them. He came along at the wrong time over in the uk we were just seeing the end of benn, watson, collins and eubank which would have been terrific fights for calzaghe to have had. Collins and Benn admit they would have had nightmares fighting joe because he is so busy for every minute of every round and at that early stage in his career could also bang before he badly injured his hands. So for a long time calzaghe didnt get fights over here that would have tested him early on until the night he fought eubank and won the title. I blame warren for the fact it took so long to get calzaghe recognised worldwide. At least now he has that recognition but its a shame its so late in his career, I think the world not just the uk has missed the chance of seeing great fight involving joe over the years. What people fail to realise as well is when they say calzaghe is fighting shot old fighters, they forget this man is 37 and nowhere near his prime. So what does that say about him that he can come over at that age and beat the top light heavy at the time in bhop? Beat Roy jones who was coming off convincing win Beat a young gun in lacy and Kessler And is still THE man most boxers at supe middle and light heavy want to fight
I admire calzaghe as boxer and I don't hate him but his wins over the aging boxer are that impressive compared to Pac a former flyweight who went up two divisions higher from lightweight and knocked out a fighter who was a former middleweight champ. If that is not impressive, I don't know what is.
Just about everyone, save for a very select few, gave Oscar all the chance in the world because of his height, his experience fighting at the higher weights, etc, etc. That is why it is not hypocritical.
listen the same people who hate on calzaghe quotes etc are the same who like PBF lol And are you telling me he talks sense?
Listen I like pac, what i dont like is the hypocritical quotes saying joe fought a shot fighter, yet pac apparently didnt. Thats inconsistant isnt it?
Look at the odds before the fight. Calzaghe was expected to win against his opponents while Pacman was the underdog in this fight with DLH. That's why Pacman's win is more sensational.
I would look sensational against a punchbag that doesnt hit back. Pac is a great fighter I like both pac and joe they are the best around right now But to call that victory sensational is a bit over the top
It's sensational in the sense that: 1. Pac was not expected to win at 1-2 odds. 2. Pac, a former flyweight, stopping a former middleweight champ 3. Pac owned many boxing writers who predicted dela Hoya to win by KO 4. Pac has proven that he is truly #1 pound for pound king.
Pac was always in with a chance the moment I heared oscar had come in light, he looked weight drained and it showed in the fight, pac fair play did his job but it wasnt sensational victory. It was sad in a way watching a guy who thinks he still has it, when he quite clearly doesnt.