In all seriousness what makes Mayweather greater/better than Calzaghe p4p

damn lol

 

* The eye test tells us that Mayweather was by far the better, more skilful and complete all-round fighter.

* Mayweather's level of opposition faced throughout his career takes a dump from a great height on Calzaghe's. How anyone could argue that Joe's pool of best wins is comparable, never mind better, is beyond me.

* Mayweather earned general acclaim as one of the best in the world, pound for pound, by the age of 21 (for example, he was Ring Magazine's number 7 at the end of 1998, and number 2 for 1999), and essentially remained there (usually at number one from 2005 onwards) right until the end of his career whenever he was active. Compare that to Calzaghe, who spent years fighting sub-par WBO opposition and didn't make the Ring's list until 2006 when he was thirty-four years old. All this despite Calzaghe being five years older and winning his first belt before Mayweather did.

* While both have missed out on legacy-enhancing fights, Calzaghe staying at 168 for so long when, a) he complained that he had trouble making the weight in any case, and, b) there were much better fights available at 175 which he never seemed interested in, is unforgivable. It's not as if he was even interesting in unifying 168 before he finally took the Lacy fight, either.

Yeah, they both finished unbeaten, but that's about the only similarity. Essentially polar opposites in how they went about their careers and how they were viewed for much of them. It's a joke putting Calzaghe in Mayweather's class, regardless of your preferred criteria.

 

Morals matter to me.
To you it could be acceptable to saline up and smash your ***** at home in front of your kids.

To me that would be just bad manners.

 

Hey that's fine but there is no question who the better fighter was between mayweather and calzaghe

 

Also that mskes your opinion invalid as you judge them off their morals and not boxing abilities and accomplishments so it's voided .

 

Fine good one . Fine point

 

When it come to Mayweather people also very often tend to forget the fights he did lose.

They wont be on BOXREC kids. but most true boxing pugilist wont forget how

• Castillo whoopped that ass first time around and got robbed.
• Not to mention Maidana, who punished Mayweather, even with the pillow gloves and still bloody won.

So really you are looking at 46-0 and 48-2 for floyd. For Calzaghe there is no blueprint.

 

Dumb thread both atgs one clearly superior. Whats next? who's greater Hopkins or kostya tszyu? There's levels to this ****

 

Joe Calzaghe vs Andre Ward would be a more appropriate comparison.

 

He beat the no 1.

And the ring had huge credibility at one point,certainly more than thin alphabet titles where challengers can be picked and challenges avoided.

 

If you watched both guys careers, I'm really struggling as to why you'd have asked the question in the first place.

Floyd was just a better boxer technically.

He accomplished more.

He has a better resume.

What's the big deal with Kessler? He was a very good fighter but nothing more than that.

Floyd's win over Oscar was better than Joe's win over Kessler.

 

Casuals lol