Is calzaghe one of the real greats?

Calzaghe was a great fighter. Never a top tier ATG though. He will never be remembered as one of the 50 greatest ever.

 

He's better than the posts indicate. To say he's not very talented is ridiculous. Unorthodox yes, but that has nothing to do with his talent.

 

people would just say dawson was green and not ready, it's joes on fault his wins are seen this way thanks to years of mediocre fighters but i think you are to down on calzaghe rather than giving him a fair go.

 

joe is IMO an atg talent, but lacks the resume to be considered an all time great. too many questions remain about him to give him this distinction.

 

Calzaghe was a remarkable competitor. This is what truly what set him apart. As a fighter he was certainly nothing special. It's a shame he isn't given more credit for what he truly was, because it was something unique and commendable. Calzaghe made himself all he could be. That's much harder than being blessed with the physical gift and natural ability. Sure, he was embarrassingly sloppy and amateurish at times. Enough desire can overcome that kind of liability apparently. That's a good lesson for all.

 

I bet you can't box worth **** for a single round.

Let's see.....Calzaghe had excellent hand & foot speed, stamina, chin, will, work ethic & was fearless. Trained from the begining by his father who had no real experience, has always lacked decent sparring, cursed with fragile hands.

For years he had no defence whatsoever & didn't have a clue how to adapt. His defense & suprising adaptability has been developed thru the experience of a decade of title fights. Next to the likes of Hopkins & Toney his skills are still average.

So what the **** got him so far if not for natural talent?

 

Ryder,

The reality is that Joe never fought an elite fighter in their prime and it was because he IS NOT an elite talent. He can't avoid the right hand, he doesn't have the reflexive sense of the truly athletically gifted, and his career is an intentionally manufactured result of good matchmaking. He is a very good fighter. He is not extraordinary. You cannot be swayed by his winning percentage. There are many fighters throughout boxing history that have winning percentages between 90-100 that are less than extraordinary.

When Joe was 25, he won the vacant title by defeating Eubank over 12. Watch the fight. He was fighting a past-peak Eubank. Eubank repeatedly catches Joe with the same right hand. Over and over. A younger great athlete doesn't get beat to the punch in that fashion repeatedly by a non-peak older athlete.

Watch Joe versus Hopkins (who was 43-YEARS OLD). Hopkins consistently gets his right hand inside of Joe's left. Hop gets there first. This is an OLD OLD fighter (this is not Hop from the mid to late 90s).

Watch Joe versus Roy (who was COMPLETELY SHOT). Roy still had the athletic talent, the reflexive ability, to commit to his punch at the moment Joe was unable to discern it was forthcoming.

The point is that Joe was NEVER in their class. He is in the class below. Joe does many things well. But, he has never been an ATG (unless you want to open up that category and include guys like Ottke or even more generously to guys like a Valuev (NV has been a champion, never been KD, has plenty of KOs, and only 1 defeat in his career)).

On paper, Joe is an ATG. But, historically, there are plenty of fighters with impressive records. Your eyes should be enough to answer any questions about where Joe stands. Do you honestly watch him fight and think, "wow, that is amazing?"

It is unfair to compare Dawson at 25/26 to any fighter who is at the end of their career (who has fought many tough battles since he was young or, in Joe's case, is between 35 and 40 years of age). But, you are quite mistaken if you really believe that the 6'3", left hander, with exceptionally fast hands, wouldn't be a complete and total nightmare for Joe, RIGHT NOW.

Whether you like or dislike either fighter is irrelevant. If you believe in Joe then you should want him to prove it against the best. Chad is the best, RIGHT NOW. It is a cop out and bull **** to say or suggest that it is a "load of rubbish dawson aint done **** all and joe beat young title contender kessler not to long ago, if joe had beaten dawson nobody would have given a ****."

 

in your opinion the who should joe have fought and at what times?

In regards to dawson he has struggled with old fighters and hasn't shown anything great yet, i agree a fight between them would be good but you must see that it aint a cop out to say people would juts call dawson green. He beat kessler and lacy after that they were both seen as not as good wins as they were before the fight started, dawson would be the same in order for a calzaghe fight with dawson to mean something big dawson would need to beat hopkins or another top guy before a calzaghe fight.

 

Listen Lazyitis, ya ****ing twit, you've always been a friggin' Joe nuthugger so what would be the point in saying anything other than "**** OFF, DICK"?

I actually think a lot of Joe. But, I don't have to suck his balls and suggest he's an elite, natural talent when he's not. He's a very good fighter that worked hard and was fortunate to have some well considered matchmaking. I understand you are desperate to have someone to idolize but I've watched his entire career so I am quite aware of what he does well. I could spend some time addressing the fiction of his chin or of his "supposed power" before he hurt his hands but "I can't be arsed" as you might say. I've never called him a bum or anything close to it. I merely have an honest assessment that doesn't require me to degrade RJJ, Hopkins, Toney, McCallum, McClellan, etc., etc. to place Joe historically at the end of a pretty long line of great fighters. You can place him on your shelf and genuflect all you want. Don't bring me your problems. I am pretty certain I can identify a great athlete when I see one. Maybe you need to get in the gym and out of your armchair, it is affecting your mind.

 

Joe is a great sure. I can't be arsed entering a discussion about it. Life is too short too dissect every minute bull**** detail. But yes, Joe Calzaghe is one of the greats in my opinion.

 

uhm...I'm not a fan of Calzaghe, & I haven't been posting here long. You're not very observant when reading posts as well as watching the sport are you. Infuture try to think before making foolish posts.

 

Ryder,

The guys who know boxing will all tell you that any conversation that begins by making any comparison of Jeff Lacy with Chad Dawson is ludicrous. There is no physical similarity (a 5'9" (listed at 5"10) bulky, slugger and a 6'3" fast handed slickster) and no fighting similarity between these two guys.

Dawson doesn't need to fight anyone to become a legitimate opponent for Joe. If Joe can fight Manfredo, McIntyre, Bika, Veit, etc., etc, then common sense (if not your own eyes) should tell you that is not an issue. There is no need for the fight to mean "anything". This is an attempt to avoid a fight not make a fight.

I don't expect Joe to fight Dawson as they are from different eras.

But, it is absurd when many here suggest that Dawson is green or isn't good enough or some other BS. Joe fought a past-peak Eubank, a 43-year old BHOP, a 40-year old RJJ, and Kessler & Lacy (who had and has less fights than Dawson today). Dawson is a young man that has fought Harding, Adamek, and an old GJ and an old AT. Dawson has plenty of time to further improve his resume. Joe doesn't.