Is Calzaghe TBE?

Changing the subject a bit, but how did you view Calzaghes win over Jones, Imperial, as I think you felt Jones was going to beat Calzaghe

 

Thanks for the reply.

I think this is one of the most honest posts that I've seen from you.

I only have an issue with a few things.

First of all, I need to know if you agree with my criteria?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. There's no right or wrong answers, and we all see things from different perspectives. Which is good, as it makes for an interesting debate.

But one of my main issues, is your rating system.

I think there's a big difference between a great performance and a great win. For a fighter to have a great win, there's many factors to consider.

I also believe that you have to consider many factors, to establish the differences between a good win and a very good win.

Now you've listed Joe's win over Robin Reid as a very good win. Yet you have only classed Roy's win over Griffin as a good win.

Joe struggled with Robin Reid. Now Serge has recently explained that Joe wasn't fully fit for that fight, due to a number of reasons. But the truth is, again for whatever reason, Joe struggled to get the win.

Now Robin Reid IMHO was no better than Montell Griffin, and Roy iced Griffin in a single round with a lead uppercut. So I find it hard to believe that anyone could consider the Reid win as a better win than the Griffin one.

With regards to Reggie Johnson, yes of course he was past his best. But you have to class it as at least a good win, if you class Joe's win over Roy and Bika etc as good wins.

With regards to Tarver, I've watched that fight about 20 times, and Roy won clearly. Also, just keep a close eye on Buddy McGirt in the corner between rounds. Listen to him continually question Tarver over and over. Buddy knows who won the fight. Tarver repeatedly failed to carry out his instructions. But you're entitled to your opinion. However, you have to give it a rating, because on paper it's an official win, and Roy burnt actual muscle to make weight.

With regards to Vinny Pazienza, yes it's a notable win, again for the incredible finish. Can you appreciate the skill level required to throw a 6 punch combination whilst walking forward? Yes, Vinny was blown up at 168, and he wasn't a great fighter. But that knockout was spectacular. A lead left uppercut, followed by two left hooks, then he switched his feet to throw a right hook, a right uppercut and another left hook. It doesn't get any better than that. I've never seen any fighter throw a 6 punch combination, with uppercuts from either hand.

I'm looking forward to your reply, because I can't see how Joe has the better wins, let alone how he clearly has the better wins.

Joe's win over Kessler can't be classed as great, because Kessler's not great.

Joe's win over Lacy was great because of the performance, and because he was an underdog, and the win gave him global recognition as a great fighter. In that sense it was great. But Lacy wasn't a great fighter. Lacy was no better than Griffin or Tarver etc, so it can't be classed as a great win, all things considered.

Again, neither can Joe's win over Eubank, all things considered.

I don't believe that Joe has a win as good as Roy's top three wins over Toney, Tarver and Ruiz.

The only win that comes close to those is his win over Hopkins, but only on paper.

Joe scraped by him, and I don't consider Jermain Taylor's and Chad Dawsons's wins over Hopkins as great wins.

If you don't agree, that's fine.

But surely, you have to admit that Roy's overall body of work eclipses Joe's?

It's cool if you rate some of Joe's wins higher, but I don't think anyone could really argue against Roy having a better overall resume.

 

Calzaghe is. tHE BEST EVEAR

Vs Americans because super joe has never to an American

 

Again, I need to know if you agree with my criteria, or if there's anything else you'd like to add to it.

Eubank was a great fighter, but he was never quite the same after the tragedy with Michael Watson. He's alluded to that on many occasions, and so has Barry Hearn.

He was extremely lucky to have gone into his fights with Collins with his unbeaten record intact. He should have lost to Ray Close, and he admitted in his autobiography that he felt he lost the Dan Schommer fight and the Benn rematch.

The versions of Eubank that fought Collins and Joe, weren't the same as the versions that fought Watson and Benn IMHO.

I agree that Joe having not fought a big name and being inexperienced, evens things out to a certain extent.

You'd got a green guy, facing a motivated legend of British boxing.

So again, Joe deserves a lot of credit.

But it just doesn't alter the following facts:

Eubank was at the end of his career, and clearly past his best.

He only had 11 days to prepare for a southpaw at a different weight.

He had to drastically change his diet, and have injections in his knees.

He hadn't fought at SMW in over two years, and he'd only fought two low key fights within that same time period.

All of the above is factual.

So again, all things considered, it can't be classed as a great win.

You can class it as a great performance. But I don't see how you can class it as a great win.

With regards to his fight against Roy, yes, Roy was extremely confident and he felt good about himself. But that didn't alter the fact that He was 9 weeks from his 40th Birthday, and Joe had said he was washed up and a fight would be pointless.

You can't class that as a good win for Joe, and then not give Roy a rating on his win over Reggie Johnson.

I'm sure you've noticed that I haven't even classed Roy's win over Mike McCallum as even a notable win.

 

We are being civil.

That's good.

We wind each other up, and we've both lost our tempers in the past.

I regret a lot of the things that I've said.

So we'll start again, and try to have an educated debate.

We all have our favorite fighters, and I admit that in the past I've been biased towards Roy.

But you make me angry when you continually bash Roy and his resume, while at the same time giving Joe a pass.

It baffles me how someone could bash Roy's resume, when it's superior to Joe's.

It also makes me angry when you disrespect fighters from the past.

But we'll move on.

Let's try and continue the debate without the name calling, and we'll see what happens.

:good

 

Ali took an almighty beating in that fight.

His only chance to win at that stage of his career, was to let Foreman punch himself out and then capitalize.

He knew that he no longer had the legs to try and outbox him for over 15 rounds.

It was one of the most courageous and stupidest things, that any fighter has ever done.

He knew when he signed for the fight, that he was going to get pounded on.

Who would want to let a 25 year old monster like Foreman, pound away at their body?

Ali urinated blood after the fight.

 

jesus MR, relax. you know how i feel about the Toney win for Jones, i've said it enough times. there's nothing new to what i'm saying.

i'd be a Jones hater if i was lying about him and situations he was involved in, yes. but i'm not. if the whole boxing world knew of Toney and his weight problems before Jones fought him, you damn well know that Jones and his team would know also. unless you're claiming Jones to be a dunce who's a bit slow?? of course he knew.

Jones pisses me off in the way he went about his career whilst mouthing off, yeah. it also pisses me off that he was on the juice. but hate him?? no. if i ignore him not fighting the best and the fact he was on the juice, i actually enjoy watching him fight. i wouldn't have his career in my collection otherwise. but i'm not going to turn a blind eye for ANY fighter. so it's not just Jones here.

i don't discredit any fighter for no reason. and i certainly don't discredit any fighter because he "made it look easy". there are many people that had big problems with Roy back then and the way he went about things, it's not just me. that's Roy's fault. no one else is to blame for the choices that Roy made, that's all on him.

you said that you didn't start watching boxing until 2000. i remember you saying it not long ago. if i looked through your history, i'd be able to find that post because it was to do with Jones or Calzaghe. so it wouldn't take much time.

if that's not the case, when did you start watching boxing then?

look, if i said something to **** you off, that wasn't my intention. you're actually my favorite person on here believe or not. but i do know how sensitive you are to Jones like i am for Joe, so it's not exactly the best topic for either of us truth being told.

but it is what it is. i wouldn't say it otherwise. i'm not some guy who's bitter about Roy and want to smear him for no reason what so ever. what i'm posting is the truth. i can't hold back on that just because you don't want to hear it.

if say, Lewis was found to have been on performance enhancers through out his career and it was made public, i'd absolutely hate that considering he's may favorite fighter. but i'd have to face up to it if it was the truth regardless of how much i hated hearing it. that's just the way it is. :good

EDIT: Calzaghe did beat Hopkins, but i wouldn't say he clearly beat him. it was close. i had it by two points for Joe. whereas i had Tarver winning the fight with Jones by three points.

 

i know that Toney always had problems with his weight pretty much. but he was able to keep it under control to start off with. but things got crazier later on and he just completely lost it. he was in no mans land for years after the Jones fight. he only got his career back on track with his win over Jirov. so that's a long time.

 

Its all cool assasin.:good

We have been over this a million times, I will just have to agree to disagree with you..:yep

I think I may have said somthing about not knowing who Calzaghe was, or not becoming a hardcore fan until around that time...

But I was a casual just about since I can remember and followed a few fighters whole careers, Jones, Lewis, Oscar, Mosley to name a few. My family were huge Jones fans, we got together for all of his fights.:good

I know we will never agree on Tarver-Jones, but I had Jones winning a close clear decision.. I thought Hopkins lost close but clear to Calzaghe as well.

 

to Loudon's first post...

there is a difference between a great performance and a great win, i agree. you can have a great performance against a tin can and it means nothing. whereas you could have a tough time or a sub-par performance against a great fighter but still get the full credit for it. a great performance against the best of the best is actually quite rare. so that's just a bonus if it happens.

i don't base the Reid win off of his resume because he's a big underachiever, it's more on Head to Head. Reid was on top of his game that night against Joe but took a swerve on the downward slope afterwards. but, when he was practically shot, he scored a good win over then undefeated Magee who's a fringe world level fighter. that set up the fight with Ottke in which he won clearly, only to be ripped off by both the judges and the ref. so i see that as a legit win. and that was a finished Reid. but if you want to see it as just a good win, be my guest.

no, Griffin wasn't as good as Reid. who has he beaten other than a Blown up fighter at the worst point in his career in James Toney? no one. Toney IS Montell's career and nothing else.

just because Reid gave Joe a good fight doesn't necessarily mean he "struggled". Reid is a world class fighter so of course he's going to put up a good fight. Joe never looked like he was going to lose. the split decision was just pure madness. but people see that result on Boxrec and use it as a bat to beat Joe with because they're bitter little Trolls. Reid didn't win that fight at all. he gave Joe a good hard fight and nothing else.

you find it hard to believe that Reid was a better win because Jones iced Griffin in a single round??? if that makes sense to you, then fine. it doesn't to me.

Jones was prime against Johnson who was a natural Middle who moved up in weight. AND he was finished at the time of the fight. whereas Joe was past his best when fighting a prime Bika when they were both natural at the same weight.
Jones was the same size as Joe as well, pretty much. that was Joe's last fight in his career at 37 at a weight that Jones was more accustomed to. Joe wasn't in his prime like Jones was for Johnson, so it definitely isn't the same. but again, if that makes sense to you, then sure. be my guest.

Roy didn't beat Tarver clearly by any stretch of the imagination. he lost. most people thought that at the time. so did i.
you should listen out for McGirt in the corner for most of his fights to find that that's the way McGirt is pretty much. there's nothing out of the usual from him in the Tarver fight.

you've contradicted your point with regards to the Pazienza fight. it was a good win based on the performance against a shot former Lightweight when Jones was prime, but not a good win for Calzaghe against Jones even though Joe was in his last fight, years past his bast, was fighting a fighter more his weight class, AND put on a great performance of boxing skill???? that doesn't make any sense either. but i take it you consider the McCintire and the like, even though they're tin cans, as good solid wins for Joe because he put on great performances??? or are you going to contradict yourself again??

i don't consider both Lacy and Kessler as great fighters, just very good fighter's. they were great wins though. they're both better than Griffin and Tarver as well. that cannot even be argued.

to give you examples of very good fighters being great wins...

Floyd over Castillo and Corrales.
Ali over Foreman and Frazier.
Froch over Bute and Taylor.
Hamed over Bungu.
Foreman over Moorer.
Jones over Hill.

all things considered, Calzaghe beating Eubank is a legit great win based on the fact that Joe was so green and didn't have a win worth anything coming up against a well seasoned vet. so all things considered, it definitely is a great win.

wins over Eubank, Lacy and Kessler are better than Jones' wins over Tarver and Ruiz all day, and every other day of the week. especially the Tarver "win" according to you, based on the fact that it wasn't a good performance from Jones and was very much a struggle. unless you contradict yourself again of course??

don't forget who Ruiz actually is. he's not this special win for Jones that you try and make out. it was in fact, a serious, and predictable cherry pick from Roy.

the Hopkins fight was admittedly an eye sore to watch, but the it doesn't change the quality of the win in any way shape or form. most fights at this level throughout history have been tough going for the very best of the best. Joe shouldn't be singled out on this just because he had a tough fight against a fellow ATG, because that's what happens for all fighters pretty much. there's nothing out of the ordinary here.

the win for Taylor was great, no doubt. Chad, not so much due to how much Hopkins had left at that point. so i'd consider it no more than i good win.

 

i agree that Eubank changed as a fighter after the Watson fight. but if he was pushed hard, and not left to roam around and take his time, he fought back like he always did. so it depended on who he was in the ring with.

i'd have to score both of those fights to give my opinion. but the Benn rematch i can remember my score (Benn won by 1 point) so i agree there.

i totally agree that Eubank wasn't as fresh in the Calzaghe and Collins fights compared to the Benn and Watson fights. he was past his best by that point, but not as much as many make out.

i don't know about the injections in his knees, but i do know that Eubank made weight for Joe in the same way he's pretty much always done it. you can check it out if you want to see how much he weighed before his fights and how much he needed to lose. nothing out of the ordinary from what i can remember.

Eubank only retired because he knew he wouldn't be getting any more big fights in the UK because he either faced off with then before any way, or they weren't going to come over and give him a shot. if he wanted the fight, he'd have to travel for it. and we know that Eubank liked to stay at home so he wasn't doing that. so he retired.

you do know why Eubank went up to Cruiserweight don't you?? if was due to there being a British fighter with a World title on his own doorstep so it was easy to make that fight happen. it wasn't down to Chris not being able to make SMW or LHW, because he could make those weights. it was due to the World title being there and nothing more. Thompson out-weighed Eubank big time.

forget what Joe said before regarding the Jones fight, that doesn't matter. Jones phoned Joe up and asked for the fight. Joe gave it him. the rest is history. Jones was only two years older than Joe, not some old man facing a prime fighter with lots more time to go in his career, it was against a fighter that was fighting his last fight. so if Jones is going to be called an old man here, then so is Joe.

and rightfully so McCallum not being a good win. McCallum was so shot he resembled a statue. only a statue had more moves than Mike had that night. :yep

 

well, if Ali took an almighty beating that night, then you can't consider it a great win because Ali didn't look good. he struggled.

that's not my opinion, that's yours.

but do you agree that Ali should have been DQ'D due to the messing around with professional equipment based on the rules?? or do you let that slide??

so, just to get things clear. you have no problem with all the other fights i called good wins??

just the Hopkins, Lacy, Kessler, Eubank and Reid fights??? which is funny if you ask me, because they're the only wins that are rated better than good. but you have a problem with all of them... Hmmmmm. but no problem with the Hill win i called great? and i was being very fair with that win.

to not call Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy and Eubank great wins, is clearly being unfair. thy are straight up legit.

 

cool. it's all good in the hood, man. :good

by the way, while i have you here. remember when we had the avatars up, and you had that guy with the guitar? who was that? because that's how i picture you when i see your name.

 

no, but better than pedjr.

joecal beating hopkins>>>pedjr entire career.

 

It was likely Daniel Johns. The front man from Silverchair.

I am a big fan of them, Mind Reader is actually one of their songs.