Is Joe Calzaghe a H.O.F fighter...and is Cal a legend, an ATG, or great fighter?

It's rare to see a fighter as good as Calzaghe.

 

I think he is great, and ATG is tough to figure. I think he loses to many ATGs, but they were exceptional. I think the thing to do with Calzaghe is to take his opponents and see if he beat those guys better than other guys did, and he did. I am not a person who believes in comparing records, but he did beat up Manfredo easily. Not that he should't have. But he beat Lacy easily and he beat Eubank and then he beat older fighters Hopkins and Jones who are still decent. If he retires now there is not much you can say bad about him. Would it have been better had he retired after he had a loss?

 

Burt Sugar disagrees and he wrote the book on all time great fighters, twice.

Check the interview on the ESPN boxing site where Burt responds to that question.

 

Viva Calzaghe!!!!!!!

 

You disgust me.

 

He's just a HOFer.

 

"Just a Hall of Famer" LOL

Obviously to be that is a big achievement. I call him a modern great, NOT an all timer.

Joe has the longevity, the 2 exceptional unification wins (Lacy, Kessler) and a smattering of good wins over just past their prime ex champs like Eubank, Brewer, Woodhall, Mitchell, Reid...these guys still had some fight in them. This is all an achievement.

However, he didn't fight anyone at all good between the Mitchell and Lacy fights. A full 2years of substandard comp (Ashira, Veit rematch, Salem etc).

Ring champ at 2 weights. Most fighters don't win one Ring title, never mind 2.

HOWEVER, at 168 and 175 he didn't make m/any good defences of the crown when he had the recognition.

A definite great at super middle, a RECENT division. His handspeed and adaptability and engine made him formidable at that weight. But the lack of power and the chin were more of an issue at light heavy, especuially if he stayed there (down in all his light heavy fights). Light heavy being TRADITIONAL division.

The other mark against him: he was kept away fro counter punchers, didn't learn really how to fight a counter puncher until DURING the sloppy Hopkins and Jones "cash out" fights.

Retires undefeated, great achivement, HOWEVER, 2 were split decisions so that puts an asterisk next to the unbeaten record. He will get in the HOF for the Kessler fight and for going to America in a pair of flops vs spoiling opponents.

Don't like the man, the career has been hard to watch but he has got British and European fighters respect on the world scene & recognition.

 

That's a pretty good overall take, man. His opponents from 1998-2002 were largely weak as well.

 

ATG constitutes top 50 not 100...and Jcal is not top 50 material

 

Calzaghe is easily a Hall of Fame fighter. He was great. An outstanding pugilist.

 

I think from 97-02 there are enough big names to make him credible - Eubank, Reid, Woodhall, Brewer, Mitchell. My big issue is that after his little scare/exciting tear up with Byron Mitchell, he took 2 years of easy fights (although to be fair the Lacy and Kessler bouts were worth the wait).

I do think Joe is a greedy hypocrite though. In his book he said Jones is shot,I'd never fight him. Soon as RJJ has convinced HBO to cough the $$ up, Joe fights him. Though all boxers fight for money, Joe seems totally ruled by the dollar, the easiest fight for the biggest money (though obviously the US broadcasters make it this way so they must take some bame), a compleely shameless fighter.

Also, Joe complained that Wright, Hopkins, Tarver etc were part of a little clique, who just wanted to fight each other & avoid an outsider that would beat them (i.e. Joe meaning himself). So when Joe becomes part of the big party, when he becomes the name that ppl gun for, he won't fight any of the guys that want to fight him like Dawson and Johnson. He made abig mistake missing the Pavli fight, allowing Hopkisn to get massive credit for something Joe - The Man at 175 - could have done.

Joe is an outstanding fighter but he isn't the fighter he could have been.