In 12-16 months Hatton & Calzaghe will be p4p 1 & 2

It does change things a little, or Wlad could beat up Pacman and get credit. Now he is fighting Winky (no spring chicken and no 170 lb fighter). Personally I see beating Kessler at 168 as being worth more than beating Winky at 170. I favour Calzaghe more heavily over Winky than Kessler (you could make a case he is top 10 P4P, he has really dominated his opponents thus far). Hopkins is a legend but I consider him past his best and no longer around the top 5 P4P fighters, no way. This is 2007. Obviously Americans will see things very differently.

 

Take a break, China Joe! You'll burn yourself out, man!

 

We will see ONE of those fights in the next 12-16 months at best.

 

You have to agree with everything I said though.

 

Trinidad was rightfully around Top 3 P4P at the time of the Hopkins fight. He looked even more dangerous climbing up in weight a destroying Reid and Vargas, and he looked as viscious as ever in demolishing a still very-game Joppy. His 2-hand power, his greatest asset, translated to 160 easily. Hopkins's gameplan and ability to tear him apart doesn't detract from that.

 

Do I have a choice?

 

We have hindsight. Trinidad's P4P ranking was bogus and a result of the American boxing media. It is like Toney was considered by many to be the P4P number one. Now we know, in hindsight that was rubbish.

Now Floyd Mayweather is number one, in hindsight, the logical fan will look back and say.."Well actually Calzaghe was probably number one"


We cannot just ignore hindsight. We now know Reid is nothing much, we know Trinidad wasn't really that good.

If we don't ignore hindsight, then the credit we give Calzaghe for beating Lacy needs to be infinite. But as we do we know Lacy wasn't really the saviour of boxing, the new Tyson etc...

 

Not if you are a fan of logic.

 

calzaghe in top 3 p4p...and now he´s hungry too...uuuh...
honesly.be real for f...k sake!

 

Make a case for anyone other than Floyd and maybe Pacman being above Joe. Don't start that "he's he has beat nobody" rubbish. If you are the best, you are the best whether you fight an Eric Crumble/James Toney like fighter or whether you fight Roy Jones.

 

Reid is nothing much... but why? Vargas was never quite the same... but why? Joppy never got back to championship form... but why? Ok, that last one is because he was getting old and wasn't as good as Hopkins or Trinidad.

Trinidad's standing was well-deserved. Your suggestion that Reid was never something is speculation. He was a young talented fighter, a beltholder after only a handful of fights, who looked rather good against Trinidad early in their fight before Trinidad rocked him, roughed him up, and wrecked his confidence.

You're giving a little too much credence to hindsight. It's what we in the States refer to as playing Monday Morning Quarterback. What we lose when looking back at things are the little nuances and circumstances that made things the way they were. Trinidad earned his way to the top based on what people actually saw from him at the time. Hindsight can tell you what things you could do to probably capitalize off his mistakes, but that doesn't detract from what he actually did in the ring.

 

oh, dear...are you forcing me to be free, by any chance, China Joe?

 

It does detract from things. Just look at Tarver's last fight, it has to be taken into consideration. Hopkins was never, ever the real P4P number one.

 

It can detract, but how much it does is another story. Hopkins did not have a legit argument for the #1 P4P fighter at the time of the Tarver fight anyway.

Hindsight suffers many of the same flaws that present analysis does. You can overemphasize or overlook things from the past.