I find it hilarious that people think Taylor can have success at SMW.

There's only one way to know for sure...hopefully we get to see this fight in the future:good

BTW, great avatar

 

Hopkins and Calzaghe are two different fighters Ramshall. In fact, at this point Hopkins has little to no chance against Calzaghe as well.

We are not dealing with a peak Hopkins, nor a man who fights anything like a boxer-swarmer with an absurd workrate and accurate shots from all angles.

 

if you wanna say you think Cal would win, fine I disagree but its a reasonable opinion. . . Cal is a good fast fighter. . . but if you try to say "Taylor has no chance" thats just silly and makes you look bad.

 

Well, many impartial posters would agree, posters with advanced experience with boxing, including Brooklyn1550, who is an american and an outside observer of Calzaghe with no bias.

I don't feel I am being biased, I feel I am telling it like it is and most knowledge analysts agree.

 

Taylor may be a bigger than average middleweight, but he would have a clear physical size disadvantage against Joe. His speed at middleweight doesn't come close to Joe's at super. His power at middleweight isn't enough to put away welterweights. His workrate is unremarkable; Joe's is phenomenal. In what area does Jermain size up against Joe? Typically when someone is outclassed in literally every determinable area - it is safe to say they have no chance.

 

I for one do not like Taylor's chances at 168, for a lot of reasons, size not being one of them. Plus, 160 is a lot deeper anyway, there are a lot of guys to fight there.

 

I dont think a handful of fanboys on ESB count as "most knowledge analysts"

 

JT is a huge MW at 6'1". . . Cal is 5'11". Id say the overall size is about even. Cal would have the speed advantage, JT would have the Jab and Power advantage. Experience would be close but Id give it to JT since he's gone 36 rounds with Hops and Winky. . . .all three ranked higher p4p in my book than Cal.


4. Taylor
6. Winky
7. Hops
9. Cal

 

I have already argued with you on the subject many times, you spin nothing new and there is no point since you will not agree with me on the subject of Taylor or send any opposing evidence to the theories that I present.

You're views on Taylor are that of any media fed tool, I argue with these views all the time and there is no point bothering with someone who is nothing but rude.

 

3 months?

Deal, I hope you comply.:deal

 

I find it hilarious that you think a prime Kessler could beat a prime Toney, Bhop and Hagler....maybe its just me..

 

:yikes

 

He could. Just because those 3 are massive heralded names doesn't mean they beat everyone who is not a massively heralded name.

Kessler is a stylistic hell for Hagler outright, B-Hop would be a close fight and Toney shells up too much and is way to open for a jab to begin with. It's not like Toney was consistent either.

But Calzaghe beats all 3 with ease peak/peak, no question.

 

Yeah, I'm sure he's never actually WATCHED Taylor.

I hate to say it Amsterdam, but Blocky is owning your ass on this one. He's by far making the better arguments.

Nice to see you goaded people into the real argument, which is whether Taylor could beat Calzaghe. I personally think not, but it's a much more reasonable argument than the argument that Taylor would be outside of the top 10, or even the top 5, at 168. The only logical argument for him not doing well at 168 (which you haven't even made) is that his heart just isn't in the sport anymore, and he's going the way of Panchito. He's looked worse each fight lately, and that's probably the best explaination - lord knows he doesn't have that many ring miles on him. Still, he absolutely punked guys who were the quality of the guys 3 - 10 at SMW, even if he's regressed, he should still be able to beat that level of fighter.

If you think Taylor's overrated, fine, you're entitled to your opinion. If you think he's lost 4 of his last 5 fights, fine, but there's a reason you're in the minority there. If you think he's a C+ level fighter, well that's just plain dumb and ignorant.

 

Blocky, you show a lack of sensible knowledge with every post on these subjects. You cannot correctly analyse, the only thing you have down correctly is that Calzaghe is a stylistic hell for Kessler and one that will give him a one sided victory.

But you believe that Taylor is superior to Kessler, this is absurdity and only because Taylor fought bigger recognised names. You haven't even correctly assessed Kessler's ability.