Joe Calzaghe's 46-0 vs Floyd Mayweather's 42-0

Joe was a good fighter but his record (46-0) and often mentioned 10 years as champion is grossly misconstrued to the public.

Joe became THE main guy when he beat Lacy, unifying the WBO (4th belt) and the (IBF 2nd best belt after the WBA **** ups) so in reality he was top dog for 3 yrs from early 2006 to end of 2008...where he became champion in 168 and 175.

Problem is, he took on one past his prime ATG in Hopkins and shot R. Jones so whilst they looked good on paper they dont tell the real story.

I honestly feel its like a Russian billionaire son who can fight somewhat and persuade the wheel bound Ali, the deteriorating Frazier, old men Holmes and Foreman to come out of retirement and fight...then he can say he beat 4 all time greats.

Of course the above is an extreame example but the main point is there...taking on names dosent do anyone any good.

Povetkin is going to take on Holyfield, then most likely Rahman...dosent mean Alex is a super start killer heavyweight.


I honestly believe Joe is not an all time great, forget the hype of all these weight divisions, compare him to the guys around 165 to 180...he dosent. Not in the same league.

Ricky and Joe are the same level fighters...great British but ok world champions..done, dusted.

Of the last 30 years only 2 british fighters were great...L. Lewis and Naz.

The next level are good champions and Joe belongs in that category.

 

In your opinion

 

Theres really not much else he can do apart from maybe move up and face Martinez which I very much doubt happens.

 

Then I will never rate him amongst the top fighters I've ever seen.

 

Come on now.I think you have a strong dislike for the man to be honest.Hes clearly an ATG.The only reason Manny Pacquiao is #1 now is because he retired.

 

Thats fine.We all have opinions.

 

Strong dislike?!? Seriously, get ****ed. I put too much effort into analysis to rank a fighter based on my personal opinion of him, anyone not called Jonsey will tell you that.

I have my reasons, and trust me, they are not based on 'bias'.

 

As to your post directly above my last one Benoit: :thumbsup

But mine are NOT based on bias :good

 

That really says it all so either way as far as you are concerned he gets no credit.

 

How many fighters in history would you say without doubt would beat him from 130-147?

 

A better question - who do you think he could beat?

 

That means little, but quite a few.

And Olu: **** off you're a ****in idiot.

 

Another thing that bothers me, Marquez, Ortiz, Khan, Mayweather, Mosley, Cotto. These men are literally all the same size given from 1 pound to 10...its nothing. Boxing has diluted the sport so much, that the meaning of champion is gone. So we then have this situation where guys like Ortiz or D. Alexander are considered former champions when in reality if boxing was ran properly they would never have become champ.

Stupid when people say Marquez is so much smaller than Floyd or Pac much smaller than Cotto. **** that.....Haye against Valuev thats small against big.

Pac against Dawson...thats small against big.

I understand the need for weight classes, but not that many...your just diluting the product hence why in football the Europa league is ****, just another fabrication of competition.

In reality the weight classes should be this-

Super-Heavyweight - 210 plus
Heavyweights - 185-210
Light-Heavyweights 170-185
Middleweight 155-170
Welterweight 140-155
Lightweight 130-40
Featherweight 130 - and Below


In fact fighters should never even be able to jump divisions as the whole point being is that its not fair for say Pac to fight A. Harrison as Pac could never weighed 210 with a low bodyfat. Fighting in 2 weight classes is possible....but 3, 4 or 6 stupid.

So when we get 20 weight champs you know there is a problem.

 

Well I just cant see how anyone other than someone who dislikes him can say hes not an ATG.Im not saying hes the best ever or anything stupid like that but any 'expert' will say hes a great.Even the '*******s' would say that and rank him as the best win on Pacquiaos record if he were to beat him.
I mean who should he have fought to make you look at him as an ATG? Antonio Margarito? Cotto?

 

Think you need to give a full explanation as to why you don't rate him highly that way people cannot think it is based on a strong dislike. I know its not. I dislike Sugar Ray Leonard intensely as a man but cannot deny his greatness as a fighter.