i'm convinced

In what way is that 'greater' than when he took on Kessler?

 

:yep

You're spot on in this thread. Whether or not a fight fan considers Joe an ATG or not, which doesn't matter, he gets a terrible lack of respect from the opposition, to ridiculous levels.

His resume is very good, as are the majority of his performances in his wins, which count as much as a 'win'.

Same morons say things like 'Kessler fought nobody, ducked Miranda', ignoring the fact that Kessler dominated a set of fighters superior to Miranda prior to losing to Calzaghe and was the unified champion no less.

If Kessler's a 'nobody', then who is somebody, only other established ATG's?:think

Or only North American recognised TV fighters of all levels?:think

 

It's not.

Fighting Pavlik would be another good addition, but Pavlik's just the next guy these types jumped on in the hopes that Joe gets defeated.

Kessler is a MUCH BETTER fighter than Pavlik.

Prior to Pavlik beating Taylor, he had been in battles with gate keeper level fighters, even being dropped by two of them, defeated Taylor in a come from behind victory and defeated Miranda.

Kessler beat a guy as good or better than Taylor in Mundine by a near shutout score, very dominative. Beat the rest of the guys like Andrade, Siaca, Lucas and Beyer by shutouts or blowout's with zero struggle.

Pavlik's also visibly not as good or well schooled. It's madness that he's considered in this class?

 

Cotto,amsterdam- Nice To See You Guys Fighting The Corner Of A Brit,and Not Share The -'hes A Euro,so Cant Be That Good,there Must Be A Catch'- Mindset Of Many Of Your Countrymen.(though Many Will Deny It)
You Just Judge The Fighter And The Accomplishments.:thumbsup

 

Joe could beat Pavlik, Dawson, Roy and Tarver and retire 49-0 and they'd still say 'he wasted his career from 99-2005 and even though he has an ATG resume, I still won't rate him as an ATG because of something trivial like that'.:yep

If you're recent resume is good enough to get you to the P4P #2, I'd say you've got a pretty damn nice resume.

 

Calzaghe's my favourite fighter of all time. I come from a boxing fan family, I've been following Joe ever since he greatly entertained me in 97 against Eubank, that's 11 years as a Calzaghe fan.

Some spots were rough, but he's always been criticised.

His resume is not phenomenal, but it's great none the less, underrated to every extent and always will be by certain types.

 

frank warren and joe were happy enough on friday night fights whilst jones was still undefeated. he then mouths about kelly pavlik, before changing his tune when pavlik appears happy enough to fight him. not the sign of a atg.

 

probably because roy can't fight himself

 

Yep, and people here would say Pavlik was exposed and overhyped, Dawson was a pretender and overhyped, Roy was way past his prime and would have killed him in his prime, and Tarver was nearly as old as Hopkins and has never been any good to begin with. Then they'll throw some other name out and say 'now, if Calzaghe's not a hype job he really should fight this guy.." etc., etc. He can't win.

 

and i know you meant roy said he wanted nothing to do with joe, probably because roy was the more recognised fighter and frank warren was quoting terrible figures and demanding a location in the uk for the fight, joe's comfort zone.

 

no joe could beat jones and possibly tarver.he hasn't had any muster on his punches in a while if ever nay real power. what makes you so convinced pavlik is in a lesser league than kessler.what real wins does kessler have and you throw names out there of guys with good padded records and expect that to mean anything.i can see a good old fashioned tooth and nail fighter just doesn't do it for you.but don't put them down because they won't win any gymnastics tournaments.a fighter has to use the tools he was dealt.some have speed ,power athleticism,coordination,heart,balance,high pain thresholds, excellent timing, great reflexes.just because someone doesn't posess the attributes you like you want to insult their game.joe has 49 wins with only one fight against an all time great and one who definitely seen better years.joe chose to remain on his side of the water for the majority of his career that's his own fault and for that reason his record is what it is. i'm not saying the us produces the best fighters,but it does produce the best promoters,which is why the biggest fights of recent times happen in the us you want big fights you link up with big promoters

 

All fighters get haters. It's part of boxing. I personally think it's down to predominantly 2 things that makes JC so hated. His style of fighting, i.e, slaps and that he's undefeated. People go on and on about who he hasn't fought and when asked who he hasn't fought they reply with, prime Jones, prime Hopkins, prime Toney, prime Eubank, prime Benn. 5 of the greatest fighers in the recent 160/168 era!!! Then they say he ducked Johnson who achieved nothing at 168. He can't win.

But it's not as if Calzaghe is the only fighter ever hated on. It's actually quite funny how some posters on here can turn at the drop of a hat. In a thread about Hopkins v Toney a while back, the amount of **** said about wither fighter was quite astounding. Even Sweet Pea and Jones have been mercilessly slagged off.