if calzaghie had fought this roy jones VID

well said :good

but quality of opposition comes into those equations.

after saying that, joe was always in terrific shape for his fights. i was always impressed by his stamina and i dont think that many people appreciate how disciplined you have to be to consistently be prepared for 12 rounds every fight.

calzaghe always was.

 

I'm sorry, but Calzaghe was nowhere near the peak of his prime when he fought RJJ. Forgetting the fact he was 37 and was nearing a half century of fights, both his hands were shot to pieces and he was a fair bit slower than I'd seen him years before - maybe that was mainly due to stepping up to Light Heavyweight though?

I agree that RJJ was on the slide more than Calzaghe, but i need to correct the myth that Calzaghe was still at the top of his game when they fought - it's simply not correct.

 

i tend to agree but because calzaghe didnt leave a genuine benchamrk for his abilities at world class level that is what creates all the problems about him.

calzaghe was excellent against kessler, a fight i watched in denmark and raked in a fortune in personal bets, but unless kessler proves his worth in the super sixes calzaghe's going to continue to be judged - and its his own fault.

 

The money was there for Hatton because he got Tszyu in the ring and beat him, prior to that, the money wasn't there for him either, despite being huge in Manchester.

 

tszyu fought hatton because that is where the cash was - full credit for hatton for the win. no problem with that.

but even after the tszyu win the money still wasn't there for hatton.

why do you think hatton left warren and made big inroads towards thats fighting in the US, beating some challenging fighters with strong homegrown support, and landing floyd and pacman?

there is no excuse for ANY talented euro fighter to make that jump UNLESS they dont have the passion and desire to do it.

ricky hatton did.

 

As for Calzaghe's prime - I put it around about 1999-2003 when he tried to face Hopkins for the first time.

He was still punching straight and hard, he was decisively beating the top fighters in the league and made a habit of facing the guys that were robbed against Ottke and then handing them a convincing defeat.

He was underdog in a few of those bouts too, such as the Starie and Reid fights, he also was the underdog against Eubank, so it's not like he never fought as the guy expected to lose prior to Lacy.

2003-2004 was when the hand injuries started to occur frequently, had to postpone a few bouts, broke his hand severely against Salem and finished that fight one handed, he was also entering his thirties.

I also feel post 2004, he felt unbeatable after being hit a few times and being able to recover, he stopped doing the basics and "Macho Joe" came out a hell of a lot more. I feel if "Macho Joe" faced Eubank, he probably would have lost.

 

He fought Hatton cause Hatton called him out and fought his way to be Tszyu's mandatory.

Why did Hatton leave Warren? Because he wanted more of the purse himself and didn't appreciate that Warren was the reason he had a name in boxing.

For all of the knockers of Warren (I am definitely one) - you can't argue what the man has done for British boxing.

As for the idea that boxers have to go to America, nonsense. Maybe that was the case in 1990, but it's not in 2000. European boxers at the moment are dominating the weight classes from 160 up.

 

if calzaghe "tried to face hopkins" he wouldnt have left it to fate.
the MW and LHW divisions were poor at that time internationally - theres no excuse for calzaghe to clean up fighters he was EASILY better than.

 

if hatton left warren because he "wanted more of the purse" then why did it take 3-4 fights in the US after he left him (that never happened under warren) to land fights with floyd and pac.

seriously - you can afford to be this naaive.

i hate to be judgmental but thats a ****ing joke.

 

He didn't leave it to fate.

You need to go back and review what HBO and Don King said about the fight, that Hopkins agreed to an amount given for Joe Calzaghe to face him in America, then called back the day after and ****-canned the fight.

You also need to review the fact that Jones Jr himself even said that Calzaghe and his team approached in in 2002-2003 for a fight and that Jones Jr said the risk vs reward was not there. Eubank confirms this story.

Like I said above, which you seem too ignorant to understand and realise - Joe Calzaghe was not a money fight, combine that with the fact that some respected names in boxing (Benn/Eubank) were telling everyone that he was a superb fighter and he became like Darius M.

Lacy changed that for Calzaghe, much like Tszyu changed it for Hatton.
Prior to Tszyu, who had Hatton faced?

At least with Calzaghe, he can point to having faced ex champions prior to Lacy.

 

You realise Hatton earnt more with Warren than he did post Warren? Oh, I guess you didn't. It's also quite funny that Hatton lost all sense of discipline post Warren and went from a guy who enjoyed a pint to a guy who drank too many pints.

I don't like Warren at all, but blaming him for things like Calzaghe not facing Hopkins when Hopkins is to blame there, is just ****ing stupid.

 

LOL i was about to post the same but you beat me too it. :happy

It wasnt an east belt and its the reason RJJ and Bhop wanted no part of JC, the risks were too grave to imagine for them.
1 Losing to a guy not many americans had heared of
2 Losing face with their own public and more importantly financial gains for future big fights.

Lets see how many americans beat Kessler shall we?

And lets be honest here how many were saying Joe was going to be demolished by Lacy and only after the demolision went the other way lol they changed tack to "well lacy was overhyped "etc.
The fact is after that fight lacy was finished his confidence drained from him in that fight and he has never been the same.
Now after several beatings, the JC haters are saying well look who else has beaten lacy etc, but how can you judge him now after such a humiliating beating?
Would those same fighers dare go near lacy had he beaten joe? no chance
And it wasnt just that occasion where the opportunists struck yet again, after Joe rightfully got the decison against Bhop after Bhop tried to Tango with joe all night lol, people actually thought BHop won the fight, lets analize this shall we he was ring champion fighting in the U.S, and all he could do was grapple hold hug and survive.
He was clever though ill give Bhop that he knew giving JOe room to move was the key to Joe dominating and he nulified that, but as a performance by a defending champion it was a disgrace.
So of course out come the haters yet again saying joe beat an over the hill fighter (forgetting joe was 37 himself lol) and hardly a spring chicken.
And the drum beaters come out with Pavlik to destroy Bhop and prove the fraud joe is, what happens? Bhop destroys him and I mean destroy in what was a fabulous performance by an over the hill old man:rofl
When all is said and done I think it just sticks in the teeth of Joe C haters that he was undefeated and beat the current best light heavy in the US and it is killing them so bad that they are wheeling names out one after another, why doesnt he fight dawson, tarver, Taylor, Johnson(another old man but seems to be good enough now)
What happens after the RJJ v Bhop rematch, will the haters be saying ahh see thats the fighter Joe should have faced lol
He did and he beat them.

 

is hopkins is to blame for not fighting calzaghe, a better fighter than hatton is anyway, then why did hatton get his defining fights and calzaghe didnt?

"earnings" dont mean **** if you dont test yourself.

you keep trying to justify your posts dismissively. thats a trait of people with poor character so dont do that over the net.

 

you should.

thats the essence of calzaghe's legacy now.

 

no its not. Not at all. Still BADINTENTIONS2...its time to take a chill pill on Calzaghe. Uve commented enough in this thread alone.