If JMM beats Casamayor while Calzaghe beats up a faded legend, should JMM jump to #2?

I am a Calzaghe "nuthugger" and I would have to agree that Joe could stop Roy by swarming him. Joe must have decent power or everyone would walk through his punches. He doesn't have one punch ko power though.

 

Your being born in the UK doesn't change the fact that European boxers get alot of stick for being European. Persoanlly I don't care for where a boxer is born, Emanuel Augustus is one of my favourite boxers. The fact is that the term Eurobum exisits and is used mainly by Americans. Is my belief that the term Eurobum exists part of my persecution complex?

 

For one who is so disparaging of irony, you sure have a penchant for its lowest form, sarcasm.

There is nothing wrong with consulting BoxRec. It’s a fine database with very complete and up-to-the-minute information for research and for fight fans.

However, my point was that simply looking at Joe’s record on BoxRec did not warrant the conclusions you drew, namely that all of his stoppages were similar to his Manfredo bout.

I stated in my post that “…most of his early career stoppages bore little resemblence to that bout. "

Anyone who has seen Roy’s earlier fights can attest to that fact. Most of his stoppages came after one or more knockdowns when his opponent was obviously hurt, in contrast to the situation in the Manfredo stoppage.

A fairly sweeping generalization regarding "most Calzaghe fans" which in itself indicates a bias; but more worrisome, a continuation of your earlier tendancy to cavalierly dismiss viewpoints that are not in accord with your own.



The reply certainly did have meaning. Without reitterating the entire post, the point was that a UD or TKOs could be more dominant than a KO. The examples cited were in support of that point.

Your last point is the very point I was challenging.

The fact is, Joe used a lot more power earlier in his career and devastated opponents in one or two rounds, usually after one or more knockdowns when his opponent was obviously hurt, in contrast to the situation in the Manfredo stoppage.

As I’ve already mentioned, that statistic does NOT support the assumption. Fans who actually saw the fights would be aware of that.

Are you being deliberately obtuse here?

The points about Hearns-Leonard (and others) was to support my point that TKOs could be as dominant and devastating as Kos.

Where is there any evidence that I lumped Tarver-Jones together with Calzaghe-Manfredo ?

Quite the reverse. I pointed out that if you saw ONLY THE RESULT and not the fight, both fights would show as an early TKO. And then I showed that all TKOs were not the same kind of item, and supported that point with examples. This was to counter your attempt to lump them all together.

You’re the one that tried to categorize all of Calzaghe’s stoppages as being similar to the Manfredo stoppage. I believe you called that bout “the most blatant example.” This led me to conclude that you couldn’t possibly have seen most of his fights and had simply relied on BoxRec to provide you with the results, concluding that TKO = Manfredo-type stoppage.

I've already addressed these points.

BTW, For YOUR Information, Jones was NOT lying on the canvas but had beaten the count and was upright when the ref ruled the bout a TKO. This reinforces my point that all TKOs are not the same, contrary to what your post would have us believe.

I am well aware of what happened in all of those fights, and that was my point.

The results of all three fights was early TKO. Unless you actually watched the fights, any further distinction would be lost.

If you had read the three results and saw just one of the fights, say the Manfredo fight, you might conclude that the others were similar as they all had similar results. This is the very thing you were doing with Calzaghe’s record and drawing erroneous conclusions as to how his other fights played out.

Defending anyone’s honour has nothing to do with this. I am attempting to correct what I feel are erroneous impressions left by your post.

SOME, but not most of Calzaghe’s many stoppages resembled the Manfredo bout, but MOST of his TKOs were much more devastating earlier in his career before he broke both of his hands and was told he would probably have to stop boxing. Instead, he found other ways to stop his opponents, based on superior workrate and an overwhelming attack. This has led to the denigration of his performances and terms like slapper being tossed around.

While it is true that at this point in his career, a stoppage is more likely to come from such activity, it has certainly not always been the case. A majority of his opponents have been convincingly stopped.

Very few of Calzaghe’s bouts are on You-tube.

On the face of it, that’s what you did. But the tone of your post is clearly denigrating of Joe’s performances.

I don't believe it does, and that's what I tried to show.

 

It takes two sides in an argument to keep a thread going.

You must have found that out from the scant attention your lenghty thread-starter post received on the subject of lb-for-lb definitions recently. http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=85534.

Having been on here for a while I can assure you that at least some of what was being posted on that lengthy thread you mention was for wind-up value. At least three of the posters were just having fun.

And while you might feel that to be a waste of time, it's something that occurs from time to time, and is certainly not moronic. The whole point of such activity is to lead someone on with tongue-in-cheek comments that are not meant to be taken seriously.

If you felt foolish for being taken in, that was not the intention. It has happened to many of us sometimes, both on here and in everyday life.


In that thread, however, I stated that I did not think Calzaghe was a top four of the past twnty five years, and in your earlier thread re Toney/Calzaghe resume comparisons, I stated that Toney had the better resume.

Despite your characterizations, I have made no posts that would indicate fanboyism.

 

You would have thought Juan Manuel Marquez would be in trouble from his recent loss to Manny Pacquaio, but there are plenty of opportunities a head for El Dinamita.

In the event that he defeats Joel Casamayor, which I think he will do comfortably, he will hold a title at lightweight and perhaps jump to #2 P4P. Personally, I don't see anyway Pacquiao could not fight a man who holds a belt in the same division as he, and is 1 rank below him in the P4P Rankings.

You might want to ask yourself one question though, in the event the Manny gets knocked out by De La Hoya, does his stock lower?

In any event, if Marquez beats Casamayor, he has some big fights still ahead of him even at his fairly advanced age. I don't know know about you guys, but there was nothing in the Pacman 2 fight that suggested Marquez was on the decline. I wish him luck.

 

In all of my dialogue with you, I have endeavoured, successfully I believe, to remain polite and keep the tone at a civil level. When dialogue degenerates to the above level, little can be accomplished in the way of debate.



Regarding your challenge to find 10 anti-Calzaghe posts:

A week ago, you made a statement that contradicted one of your earlier posts.

I pointed this out with the appropriate links.

On June 21, at 11:18 PM, You began a thread titled : " What really happened when DLH fought B-Hop?? "

see link:
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/...ad.php?t=72487

In your first post in that thread, you stated:

You advised me that some of your earlier posts were not yours but rather someone elses.

That being the case, it would be futile for me to go through your posts again, only to be perhaps told the same thing again.

Where did I say the poll was an example of irony ?

 

Congratulations. I really enjoy reading the Calzaghe based threads started by Pac huggers. They're always amusing

 

First of all, you don't appear to know what irony is, or at a minimum, don't appear to recognize it. I realize that when you get taken in, it can be disconcerting, but it's scarcely sporting to disparage the irony itself.

You do appear, however, to be passingly familiar with sarcasm, a lower form of wit.



Secondly, I have never, at any time stated that Calzaghe was the the greatest fighter of the last 25 years . In fact, I have stated clearly that he was NOT.

Please try harder to get your facts straight.



Thirdly, what is one to make of this statement:

This content is protected

If one said that Calzaghe is the greatest fighter of the last 25 years, and DID think he was, it would scarcely be irony at all, would it ?