Joe Calzaghe vs Mike McCallum Better Resume

Thats your opinion and could well be true but I think Mcallum could have beat him in my opinion same as in my opinion Hopkins should have got the nod over Calzaghe but his racist comments put paid to that ! Like I mentioned in my first post you have to take into context who McCallum fought and when he fought them,when he fought Jones he was almost 40 and taking on the reigning lb for lb Champion,Calzaghe never fought a lb for lb champion let alone at nearly 40 years old ! Take shot Jones and old Hopkins off Calzaghes record and how would it look,he needed them fights far more than either of them needed him and both dropped him in the first round and like mentioned I thought he lost to Hopkins and this is coming from somebody who has never been a fan of Hopkins !

 

You are wrong again, Loudon.

Calz had at least 15 of his 21 title defenses against "World Level" opposition. That should be suffice to have a few "gimmes" when you ruled as long as Joe did.

 

McCallum was a fine fighter, one of his best and most underrated performances was traveling to England and taking Michael Watsons '0' after Watson had just royally ****ed up Nigel Benn taking Benns '0'

Watson is such an underated fighter, many thought he also beat Eubank in their 1st encounter and was within 1 round of a clear victory over Eubank in their 2nd fight before tragedy struck.

McCallum came to England and did a number on Watson.

 

In a prime for prime fight, Mike would have had a very good chance of beating Bernard.

It's very obvious that you aren't in any way knowledgeable of Mike's career.

 

Wrong again?

When have I been wrong before?


No, Joe absolutely did not have at least 15 of his 21 title defences against world level opposition.

Joe didn't fight 15 world level fighters from his entire 15 year career.


The last time I checked, over half of his 21 defences were against non world level opposition.

I can check again.