Is Buncey spouting a load of bulls**t?

Your point was resume and I'm merely pointing out that, excluding Mayweather and Tyzsu (who many believe was on the slide, including myself), his resume is nothing special.

Calzaghe's resume isn't much worse than Ricky's till you look at Mayweather and Tyszu. I'd argue Eubank would be an equivalent to Tyszu at that respective stage. Eubank was not "shot" but certainly not prime and he often dropped that much weight before a fight. So they are similar in terms of step up (which Joe did much younger).

Kessler is a much better fighter than anyone Ricky faced between Tyszu and Mayweather.

So, it comes back to Mayweather and now Manny. He lost comprehensively to Mayweather and, in my opinion, will lose comprehensively to Manny. So you can't really state it means much when he loses to the best guy he faced. Joe didn't lose to anyone.

I'm not saying Ricky's resume is garbage just not much better than Joe's.

 

How does Barry Mac manage to consistantly get himself near the top of "Best British Boxer" polls? The impact he had on the political situation in Ireland is noteworthy but not really relevant when discussing the best British boxer.

(Conteh beats JC at 175 IMHO)

 

Sadly out of the ring factors often cloud peoples judgement of fighters. Especially casual fans.

 

I think the guy said that if Hatton beats Pacquiao then he'd be ahead of Calzaghe and I tend to agree. Prior to Lacy for Calzaghe and prior to Tsyzu with Hatton, there was not much to choose between their resumes, but Calzaghe was clearly ahead. When Calzaghe won the WBO title it was lightly-regarded worldwide - mainly a European stronghold and Hatton's long WBU reign is even-more worthless on its own. It's about comparing opponents, not paper title reigns though.

If Calzaghe defended the WBC, WBA or IBF for 20 defenses as opposed to the WBO, even with his mediocre opponents you'd have to give major credit and a boost to his status, what with their mandatories and all, but defending the 1990's WBO title against those opponents doesn't instantly propel him much higher then Hatton I think, even though he was a 'world champion'.

If you were comparing the pre-Lacy with the pre-Tsyzu, you'd have to give the decided edge to Calzaghe, but neither of them had a career to brag about in terms of ATG status, at those times. The wins to judge the career by (as I explain below the list of opponents), I would say, are:


Calzaghe wins after 'coming-out'
Jeff Lacy - Current IBF champ, undefeated. Prime.

Mikkel Kessler - Current WBC/WBA champ, undefeated. Future WBA champ. Prime.
Bernard Hopkins - Current Ring champ at weight above. Ring P4P 3. Past prime.
Roy Jones Jr - Mid-level contender. Extremely shot.


Hatton wins after 'coming-out'
Kostya Tsyzu - Current linear/Ring champ. Ring P4P 2. Past prime.

Carlos Maussa - Current WBA champ. Prime.
Luis Collazo - Current WBA champ at weight above. Prime.
Juan Urango - Current IBF champ, undefeated. Future IBF champ. Prime.
Jose Castillo - A top contender at weight below. Shot.
Paul Malignaggi - No.1 contender. Prime.


These are the wins that you should judge their career on really, I would say - when they really got onto the world stage. The wins before this stage, by either man, were mainly building-up wins against shot or past-prime ex-champions or decent, young, un-established contenders - Calzaghe has the advantage in that department.

For Calzaghe's past-prime Hopkins, theres Hatton's past-prime Tsyzu. For Calzaghe's shot Jones, you have Hatton's shot Castillo. For Calzaghe's Kessler and Lacy, you can almost balance that with Maussa, Collazo, Urango and Malignaggi. Overall, so far, Calzaghe has the advantage in pre-'coming-out', building-up wins and the slight, arguable advantage in post-'coming-out' wins.

You can bash Hatton for losing to Floyd Mayweather Jr before, but at least he had the balls to face him. It would've been a similar negative result if Calzaghe fought a prime late-90's/early 00's Roy Jones Jr. At the moment I have shown how Calzaghe is higher (although not as brave in my opinion), but if Hatton beats the prime, Ring P4P 1 Manny Pacquiao, I'd have to give the slight edge to Ricky Hatton over Joe Calzaghe.

 

Hopkins > Tsyzu

 

Are you insane Maussa never had a prime

 

Ha, yeah I guess not. At the highest moment of his career - a fluke, after which he was ripe for the picking.

 

Lewis and Buchanan both rate over Joe of post war British Boxers

 

Not IMO

 

In fairness to McGuigan he fought quality men before he won his alphabet title. Juan LaPorte and Jose Caba were both highly rated by The Ring magazine; something that can't be said of the vast majority of Calzaghe's actual 'title' challengers.

 

But Laporte and Caba were pretty much "it", theres no others on there before Pedroza.

 

I've never agreed with 'Buncey' about anything and I'm not gonna start now.
IMO there've been COUNTLESS better British fighters than Calzaghe.
In fact, there've been better WELSH fighters than Calzaghe.
Jimmy Wilde w137 (KO 99) L 5 (by KO3)
Although I guess because he was ko'd 3 times he must've been pretty ****.

 

Is there any Jimmy Wilde on Youtube

 

Post-war British fighters i'd rate above Calzaghe woudl be Winstone, Buchanan, Conteh and lewis.

As far as calzaghe batin conteh goes, i give him little chance, in fact i doubt he would beat the Chris Finnegan that gave Bob Foster an excellent fight.Joe is smaller and older at 175 and the sum total of skills conteh had compared to him is like comparing Wilfredo Gomez to Trinidad.

 

Hatton's defences were against the likes of Vince Phillips (WBU) and Calzaghe's were against the likes of Tocker Pudwill (WBO obviously)

god response :good