Is Calzaghe's Resume Ageing Well?

plus he said this "I'm not chasing after Roy Jones. Be honest, Roy Jones is a good fighter and I don't want

This content is protected

, I just want big money."
He was very satisfied defending WBO **** belt and taking money...

 

I remember watching it in 1997, I'm from Sheffield, and it was at the Arena.

It was Joe's first big fight, so he was a little green in big fight experience, but again he was 25 years old.

I still think Joe would have beaten him, even if Eubank had've had a proper camp and have prepared for him, but Eubank was obviously past his best.

It's unbelievable to think that Eubank was only 31. But like others have said, he aged quick.

It's the same with Ali. Ali was only 32 when he beat Foreman in the Jungle, but he was a very old 32.

 

Beouche,

Thanks! Ha! Bailey's relentless. He's like the Terminator!

 

Yes. Despite what he claimed, he never truly wanted to fight Roy back in the day.

It irritates me when people mention the clowning/showboating etc. Because I know that not only would he never have dared to do such a thing when Roy was prime, he wouldn't have gotten into the ring with him anyway.

When you take everything into consideration, the age, Joe's commnets etc etc, he shouldn't get any credit for that win.

Glen Johnson hardly got any credit in 2004 for destroying Roy, so I don't see why Joe should have got any.

 

Failey and company at it again.

 

You're mistaking lack of ambition and drive for lack of heart. Calzaghe didn't have the ambition or drive to go seeking big fights at all costs and was happy with his easy money WBO gig, but he did have the heart to bounce back from adversity in ring and come back stronger. Whenever he was knocked down he got back up and fought on, whenever a fighter's style or tactics gave him difficulty he changed plans and pushed on with determination to win, he adapted to any problems he had with an opponent and overcame them and won. You can fault the way he handled his career as whole and criticise him for his overall level of opposition, but you cant fault the way he rose to the occaison when he had to and beat every challenge he faced.

As I'd intimated before, I consider Calzaghe to have had the skills to give any fighter in history around his weight bracket a very difficult fight, one he might not win but which would be a damn hard fought encounter, but he didn't have the ambition to match his skills so fought stiffs for easy money for most of his career instead. Essentially, he didn't challenge as much as he could, and indeed should, have but when he did he was able to hold his own.

 

Hi pal, nice to see you.

You've made some good points and I respect your opinion.

There were a few times in Joe's career where he adapted and changed tactics, and where he had to overcome adversity etc.

But you have to look at who this was against, and at what stage of their careers they were at.

For example, I find it hard to praise him for getting up against Roy and then going on to win in dominant fashion. I can't praise that, because he never should have been fighting Roy at that stage of his career.

I personally can't give him huge praise for adapting against Kessler either, because I don't think Kessler was great, and I think he should have been a champ at 175 by 2007.

So you can say that he always found a way to win, and he retired undefeated, which is very rare, but again, you have to look at who he fought, when, and what he could have achieved but didn't.

I respect him as a fighter, because I respect anyone who fights pro or am.

But like you say, his ambition never matched his skills.


Regards, Loudon.

 

His Hopkins win definitely has decent value.

 

It's a **** resume, it has always been a **** resume.