Kessler interview. (On the Calzaghe fight)

You bang on me for saying that Joe is better now than at 28, and call me national biased, while you sit and hug onto your thought that Kessler is just another Reid, or Veit.

Gee man, you are fired.

 

Furthermore, you are on a serious memory shortage. Flip back a few pages and see me saying that Kessler had his shot, and failed, and doesn't deserve a second chance.

 

Kessler hasn't proven himself beyond the levels of Reid, Woodhall, Eubank in my view and in the views of many.

Veit would lose to Kessler, however you have to say Veit probably has a better victory on his list than Kessler by having beaten Braehmer.

Andrade is the focal point of Kessler for me, a good win against solid opposition but realistically, why is he going back to fight an unknown in Sartison when he could have faced Miranda?

He's unproven, being Danish, you just don't see that

Joe Calzaghe was unproven once too.

 

You seem to be talking in resumes, which is a big mistake on your part. Watch fights instead, and make the prober assumptions. Having said that, before 3rd of november, Kessler and Calzaghe had beaten the same amount of WCs, or former ditto. Kessler just did it in less defences.

And tell me what could Kessler have done more upto fighting Calzaghe? By calling out Calzaghe he has done more than he did in 20+ defences. Only Lucas wasn't a WC, only former, otherwise they were against beltholders, or mandatories. And he beat them all convincingly till he faced Calzaghe, whom is possibly an ATG. So unproven? He beat anyone who dared face him at SMW, besides Joe, but he didn't duck him, no, he fought him in Wales.

It is plainly obvious from your former post that you don't even regard Andrade very highly, so how can it be his focal point, when he beat Mundine only a month after recovering from a slipped disc, on foreign soil. Mundine is still considered no. 3 in SMW.

How can you rate Braehmer highly? The guy has decent skills and good power. He and Veit has no chin, and both haven't beaten anyone at top 10, other than Veit KOing Braehmer.

Lastly do not use my nationality, when nothing I have said is even remotely nationalistic. Am I accusing you for being a welshhugging troll? You don't regard Kessler very highly and I am perfectly fine with your ignorence.

I didn't like that the Miranda fight didn't amount to anything - I would have liked it, but don't blame Kessler for not having a manager that wanted this fight enough.

I have little interest in the fight against Sartison, and I am very disappointed in it, but if WBA confirms the fight as a WC fight, it will give him a belt, which he can use to reclaim bigger fights once again. Right now he is too much risk vs no reward for most SMW.

 

Kessler was unified champion - he defended his belt for the first time in Australia versus the then ranked top5 fighter Mundine. He unified against Beyer - who had just beaten Green (later WBA-LHW champion).

Veit better because he beat Braehmer??? ... the same Braehmer that was in trouble versus Velazco??? - Veit never even held a EBU-title...

Eubanks was a tougher fight - Calzaghe said - not a better fighter - there is a difference.

I think that many of the "weaknesses Calzaghe has been showing lately is due to better opposition.

 

Two Danes to the party now?

Look, "Brahmer was in trouble against Velazco" - "Andrade was in trouble against Mack"

Have I been cynical about Kessler and stated "12 rounds of hitting Andrade, didn't get him down once, yet Mack did it early in the fight, Kessler is feather fisted"

Kessler is simply not as good as his reputation around these parts is. Previously I thought that was because people wanted to boost Joe Calzaghe's achievements as something wicked but now I see it's because there are a high contingent of peole who believe he's good.

 

Oh crap - I just realized that you are just a troll - have a nice day.

 

Trolls don't tend to provide counter arguments to your points, nor commend you on the few points you got right.

Let Kessler win something against a guy on his level, a Bute, Inkin or Pavlik.

Telling me "Look at how dominant he was against previous opposition" is like saying "Wow, Tyrone Brunson is the best boxer ever" due to his 18 fights, 18 ko's all in the first round.

 

Counterarguments? You downtalk the accomplishment of Calzaghe on the 3rd of November. You say that Kessler is unproven. You claim I am too untrustworthy to debate with because I am danish, even though I state that Calzaghe outsmarted Kessler, and he is overall a more complete fighter now than at 28, despite his physical decline.

You throw rediculous sentiments that Kessler is just another name on Calzaghe's sheet in the same league as Veit, Reid etc, while it is plainfully obvious for everyone outside the state of Denmark, that he was Calzaghe's biggest threat at 168, and a unified super champ.

All you seem to try is discredit Kessler, while there is nothing bad to be said. He tried to be the first SMW in history to collect all the belts, and fight on foreign soil to do it, never ducked anyone, he has beaten several top 10 SMWs convincingly, and yet you claim he is unproven - and now you seemingly compare his accomplishments with someone who beat 18 tomato cans. And I have not even begun to talk about his skills in the ring, which you for some reason try not to get into.

Yes, you are either a dumb **** or a troll, or both.

Bute's camp has for long said that he isn't ready for Kessler...
Inkin isn't going anywhere and just withdrew again from a fight with Froch.
Pavlik is not even listed in SMW. Sure, I hope for a Pavlik-Kessler fight and so does Kessler, or a Taylor-Kessler fight, which is even more possible if one can go by what Dibella has claimed.

 

I do talk down the accomplishment of Calzaghe because ultimately he was a 36 yr old man who had seen his best days prior to that fight and trying to deny that is just pointless.

It suits your purpose, which is to hype Kessler up by making it seem like Joe was at his peak on the night he beat Kessler but the fact remains he wasn't.

It's not discrediting Kessler to say he's unproven, who has he beaten that was seriously credited as being a legitimate threat to him?

He was expected to win every fight except Calzaghe, which he got beaten in.

The top guys he's beaten, with the exception of Andrade, don't even really have a part to play in the 168lb division anymore, they've either become non existant, moved to another weight class or were well past their used by date.

The notion that Joe Calzaghe could only have beaten Kessler because of his experience and such is void, because ultimately it wasn't experience that Calzaghe used to beat Kessler.

Experience scrapes you through a close fight. The Kessler fight was close for four rounds and then it was no longer a fight.

Sorry that your guy lost, but seriously, don't get personal, it just makes my point seem all the more effective.

 

So what you are really saying is, that Calzaghe has seen better days, and yet his best wins comes from the last 3 years; Lacy, Hopkins, and Kessler.

Now you are saying Kesslers opponents aren't playing any significant part anymore - name one of Calzaghe's that does? It is totally idiotic statement - they mattered at the time.

You also said that Calzaghe was once unproven, so how can you regard him as being greater in his younger years, when he was unproven - much like you say Kessler is?

So if Calzaghe is in deep decline, but it wasn't experience that made him sway the fight after round 4 - what was it then?

You really should hold a mirror infront of yourself, as you yourself started getting personal. Your post is so full of double standards, that it is sinking in deep mud. Pointing out that you are either stupid or a troll, derives solely from your own low quality posting abilities. I didn't do it to you, you just put yourself in that position by acting smug, and ignorant. All the while you throw idiotic claims left and right that doesn't even serve your purpose of being an informed poster, or your arguments - all it is, is insubstantial hot air. Nor do you use any time to counter my counterarguments to your hot air. You just throw new, that has no rhyme of reason to your own argumentation.

 

Had Calzaghe beaten Kessler prior to beating Lacy, would anyone have cared or would they have just considered it a non-event between two euro fighters?

Ask yourself that, then you might start to realise why Calzaghe's last few wins are so hyped, it's because he became a worldwide commodity, not because his performances are better today.

As for "Calzaghe was in deep decline, what meant he could win past Round 4" - because Calzaghe in deep decline is still a far better fighter than Kessler.

Beating a guy using a jab from the outside isn't some master stroke of an experienced boxer. It's basic fundamentals.

And when Kessler, who is all basic fundamentals with decent physical attributes and great timing is beaten on basic fundamentals, it isn't strategy, it's simply that he wasn't good enough to beat a guy with 36 yr old reflexes, stamina, speed and hands that seemingly break when someone else breathes on them.

 

Yes, those who follow the sport, despite where the boxers are from. By stating that the fight only hold significance, due to Calzaghe beating a US fighter is beyond ******ation.

So Calzaghe vs Bika, Calzaghe vs Manfredo, Calzaghe vs Kessler and finally Calzaghe vs Hopkins only held significance due to Calzaghe beating Lacy?

You should ****ing stop posting, dude. You seem to confuse media hype with boxing quality.


Eubanks, Kessler, Lacy and Hopkins were his best wins, due to the fact that they are the best boxers on his sheet.

 

Obviously you haven't been around that much, all of the boxing forums have threads on Calzaghe on a daily basis these days, boxing forums generally include "hardcore boxing fans"

This didn't happen, in fact, before Lacy muttered his name, Calzaghe was only ever mentioned in the category of "European Trash"

Ask yourself how british fighter and ex champion Robin Reid in his fight against Calzaghe drew less than a third of the fans that Calzaghe vs the unknown Bika drew? Or even less still compared to the Calzaghe vs Manfredo fight.

Take a look at Winky Wright, how many great victories did he have before people started calling him great?

Here, you're defeating your own point, because you're underating Joe's performances prior to Lacy, only to make it seem ridiculous that his wins after Lacy only gain credit because he's better known.

Media hype, isn't that what Kessler had going into the fight? "Too young, too powerful, too strong" - ESPN, Max Boxing, even BBC and the majority of Forum fans all had Kessler as being too big a challenge for Calzaghe.

Bookies learnt their lesson in going against Calzaghe prior, see, when you've got money riding on things, you tend to be better at analysing it.

Funny now how the only mention Kessler tends to get is in line with Calzaghe, while Calzaghe is now rated Top 3 P4P and is mentioned in "Who would win, prime for prime" threads.

Mate, you're done, you're just getting more and more personal, more and more frustrated because any semblance you had of a point disappeared a long long time ago.

Kessler is not Calzaghe's most impressive win and I'd argue he's not even in the Top 3 and could create arguments for him not being in the Top 5.

Kessler can become Calzaghe's most impressive win if he goes on to create a legacy after this, similar to Bernard Hopkins now being one of RJJ's best victories... but until he's done that, he sits behind Bernard Hopkins, Eubank, Reid and Lacy, solely because Joe was an underdog in three of the four fights and facing a legitimate ATG in the fourth.

He's one of Calzaghe's highest profile wins, due to the media attention Calzaghe gained having defeated Lacy and believe it or not, Manfredo, but don't mistake that for one of Joe's best.

 

He is far better and yet the fight was pretty close till round 6, when Kessler gassed. You have also recently stated that Kesslers corner did him no favors, but right now it doesn't seem to matter to you?

Beating a guy where he has dominated everyone with is a master stroke. Just like it was, when he beat Lacy at his own game; on the inside.

It isn't about using basic fundamentals to beat other basic fundamentals - it's about adapting to your opponents and beating him in his own game, and taking him out of his comfort zone. Coupled with making Kessler fight away from where he is best; namely behind the jab. JC did that by clinching whenever Kessler tried to control behind the jab, and that is experience. Just like it is experience that Hopkins clinched 14 times a round to negate Calzaghe.