Kessler interview. (On the Calzaghe fight)

Kessler's corner did him absolutely no favours, but neither did his technique against Joe Calzaghe.

A technique that Joe had come up against previously, whether or not Kessler was better at implementing that technique is unknown, what is known is that Kessler was out-jabbed in the fight something like three to one.

Surely a younger, faster, snappier Calzaghe would have extended this margin, are you saying Calzaghe only learnt how to jab at 36?

Ok, so if Calzaghe faces Tyrone Brunson - 18 and 0, 18kos, all first round - he's obviously just beat the best ever fighter in the world?

Dominating people tends to make a splash if those people stick around and make an impact after you've done it. Take the RJJ vs Hopkins or Toney argument.

How much credit does Joe get for Lacy by most? Lacy is seen as over hyped and over rated and not as big a win for Calzaghe, why? Because Lacy hasn't mattered at 168lb since Joe beat him

Name me a single fighter who has mattered at 168lb since Kessler beat them?

Reid, Veit, Sheika, Mitchell, Mkertchian, Bika, Kessler, McIntyre have all mattered since Joe beat them (I could probably find more but it's past my bedtime and I'm tired)

Until someone Kessler beats truely MATTERS after he beats them, he's unproven.

Lucas, Siaca, Mundine, Beyer, none of them have done anything since losing to Kessler.

Andrade got dropped by Mack in his next match, he shapes up as the best win on Kesslers career because he's managed to come back and win since.

But Andrade is nothing to base a career on.

Tell me, how did Calzaghe 'adapt' the fundamental basic of landing the jab to beat Kessler?

Is it any different to when he filled Eubank's face with the jab and big left hand? Is it any different to when he out jabbed Reid?

What you're in effect attempting to state is that Kessler faced prime Joe Calzaghe and that's the reason he lost. This is flawed logic.

A 36 yr old fighter who relies on handspeed, reflex and stamina is NEVER in their prime at 36.

 

Yes, but I hold no regards for the uninformed posters, that only believe what media feeds them. They ditch a fighter, when they haven't even heard of them, on the sole premise that they have heard of them; meaning they must suck. They are just ******ed posters that can't draw their own conclusions, and need people to tell them what to think. Something that ie Amsterdam have had great succcess with.

Why shall I respond to the fact that most people are governed more by hype, than by what they see? Manfredo drew alot all due to the fact that he had been on TV in a reality show. I only laugh at such ******ation.

No, I have included that Lacy, Eubanks, Kessler, and Hopkins are his best wins, due to the sole fact that they are the best boxers he has faced. Lacy beat Reid, and thats where it is. I am not saying they are his only good wins, but they are the best boxers he has faced, regardless of hype. Kessler wasn't significant because Calzaghe beat Lacy, he was significant on his own accord.

Beating Andrade opened the US people's eyes to Kessler. That they are ignorant, and didn't acknowledge his talent prior to that is their own loss, I have known it since he turned pro. He was a unified champ, and you can't argue against that.

Sure... And it was a difficult fight to get right, as displayed on this site alone. The camps were divided, and even people in own camps were at a loss who could win. Not due to hype, but due to their quality as boxers.

Kessler hasn't fought since, and people don't know what to expect now. Don't blame me on that either. Most still hold him in great regard though, as you can read on this board. Almost none have said that he is an overhyped crap fighter, like they did Lacy, because they saw a great fight, where Calzaghe was the victor. Some people know boxers ability, when they see it.

Not at all, I grew tired of you having no point at all in 6-7 posts, and before you actually had some point, which is now.

Sure you could, and you are entitled to do so, however I disagree, and I am entitled to do likewise without being called a nationalist nuthugger, that can't look at things objectively.

What has Reid and Lacy done that Kessler hasn't done better? Are you likewise argueing that Kessler isn't better than the two, when you have already stated that Kessler would beat Reid?

Kessler was one of Calzaghe's best wins, because he was a prime fighter that had outboxed all the WCs that the division had to offer. None of Calzaghe previous opponents can boast of that - and thats where it is...

 

Amsterdam won't even dare go near me in an argument for the absolute pounding I gave him over his under-rating of Amir Khan and his inability to see that in actual fact, Khan is more progressed professionally than Gamboa.

Mentioning him is nothing more than mentioning a guy who comes up with ridiculous arguments (similar to some of yours in this thread, sorry)

Manfredo sold very little tickets I would say for the Calzaghe fight. By that stage, due to the publicity of the Lacy performance, Calzaghe would have sold out a stadium for fighting Kabrary Salem again.

It was simply another victory against a recognised name that allowed Joe to capitalise a little further with HBO, etc, before the Kessler fight, meaning the Kessler fight did far better numbers than it ever would have prior to Lacy.

Lacy beat a version of Reid that hadn't just been screwed out of a title. The version of Reid that Calzaghe beat wasn't in his mid to late thirties and nearing the retirement trail.

Reid had a long and storied career as both a champion and key contender to the champions over a long number of years, something that neither Lacy nor Kessler has managed yet.

Andrade was a continuation of him being a unified champion against Beyer. Beyer was what "made" Kessler, that was when he started getting HBO recognition.

Andrade was a good win, a win I rightly call his best and it won him the majority of his fans who picked him over Calzaghe (outside of Denmark) but in the scheme of things, Andrade doesn't register as a guy you can prove a career against.

Kessler hasn't had a career defining victory yet, without it, he is still completely unproven, like I said, dominating guys counts for nothing when they're not world level fighters, otherwise Tyrone Brunson would be P4P #1.

Not too difficult judging by the bookies reaction that never changed since the fight was set, nor from the majority of articles that had indepth opinions on the fight before it occured.

What I noticed was those that picked Calzaghe gave reasons of substance, not just "Calzaghe is an old man, Kessler is too young and powerful" rhetoric.

Kesslers stock is damaged not only because he hasn't fought since but because he is now referred to as a ducker due to the problems with Miranda, now fighting Sartison who no one even knows for a version of a belt that two people already held (Mundine and Calzaghe). Not the best way to prove yourself on a rebound.

Take a look at Lacy, what did he do? He fought the guy that he had a NR with and then fought a guy who had fought Calzaghe in a title fight.

The reason my posts don't seem to have a point to you, is because you're so much a fan of Kessler that you overrate him. I'm a fan of boxing, not a fan of boxers.. I'll lay it down like it is.

I'm a New Yorker who has Pavlik, Duddy and Roy Jones Jr as his three 'favored' fighters at the moment, I know none of them realistically have a chance against even this version of Calzaghe through style.

Do I want Pavlik to win? Hell yes. Would I be rooting for him to win? Hell yes, do I expect it? No.

Reid through sheer longevity and the fighters he beat throughout that long career still sits above Lacy and Kessler. Lacy's win over an older Reid could be seen as Mohammad Ali losing late in his career.

Kessler would dominate this version of Reid and the version of Reid that Lacy beat. I'm not so sure how he would do against the version of Reid that should have ended Sven Ottke's 0 and gave Joe his only disputed decision until Bernard.

Kessler hadn't outboxed all of the contenders there were on offer, Froch, Inkin, Brahmer, Bute, Berrio, Lacy himself were guys that he hadn't touched that were all better than the guys he had touched in my view.

I understand the case to be made for Mundine but there is a reason Mundine doesn't want a rematch against Kessler, Mundine isn't really a guy you can have confidence in as a top athlete, because despite some impressive performances - the losses he had to guys like Siaca are big quesiton marks around him.

Most of the guys Calzaghe beat didn't have these question marks.

Kessler got beaten more decisively by Calzaghe than Reid did, Reid fought a better version of Calzaghe than Kessler did.. this is why Reid is a bigger win.

 

I have already answered this before. I have already told you that Calzaghe in his youth made more mistakes than he does now, and I stand by my point - no point in argueing further. You disagree, okay - peace with that. I can only say that Calzaghe has struggled against lesser fighters in his youth. He doesn't now. Calzaghe has been even better vs greater opposition than in his youth. It's a fact, not an opinion. He looked like crap against Reid. He looked far from convincing against a journeyman in Salem. All evidence points to that I am correct that Calzaghe, despite a slight decline in speed, is a better overall fighter today, due to experience.

No, where do you get that idiocy from. Again, unlike you I don't go by resume, but by how they box against good to great boxers. Everyone knows that most people have tomato cans in their first 20 fights in Europe. Kessler had 39 fights. Calzaghe 41. Both undefeated against whatever was put against them. Kessler had only been more dominant against the top ranked than Calzaghe had been in some of his fights. That is fact that Calzaghe is like hot and cold. Kessler always performs, save against Calzaghe, because he was outsmarted, and shut down completely.

Yes, thats the way it goes...

And because, he was totally dismantled. That people bash him even more than they should, is not something you can blame on me.

 

boo hoo hoo. kessler got manned by JC, but obviously not as bad as Hopkins.....LOL

 

He broke his hand against Salem and still won the fight by a shutout margin. What more do you want from a one handed fighter?

Reid? Reid made him look like crap, due to the level at which Reid was boxing. Calzaghe fought one of his best fights to date against Reid, remembering this is the same Reid who held a title a few fights previously and was screwjobbed against Ottke a few years later

Calzaghe hasn't just got a slight decline in speed, he can't throw power shots anymore, his age would obviously effect his stamina, footwork and reflexes to evade shots, not to mention take shots.

You've also got to remember the other factor Calzaghe had prior to Kessler, the fact that making weight was then becoming a huge struggle each and every fight which is why he stepped straight up to 175 there after..

Being more and more weight drained would reduce his stamina, power, speed and durability.

Kessler had 39 fights, at least 30 of them were against guys that were outside the Top 100 of his division at the time he fought them. Care to dispute this?

Kessler's three top ranked opposition at that stage were Beyer, Mundine and Andrade.

Beyer hasn't done anything there after, Mundine has all but vanished at 168 and Andrade was given massive problems by Yusaf Mack in his very next fight

It's very selective to say that Kessler dominated opponents, without realising what happened to those opponents there after, remembering that everyone believed Lacy was #1 in the Division, including the Ring (hence them bypassing their rule to allow him as the #3 to challenge for the Ring crown)

Lacy deserves to be discredited for his performances after Calzaghe and it's a big reason why Kessler shouldn't be credited because he hasn't even fought yet and pulled out of negotiations against a Top 10 SMW to take a light fight against Sartison.

Bika went and won a tournament that had several very good prospects in it, laugh at the Contender all you want but lots of those guys had fought on the world level before that show.

Reid mattered even four years after losing to Calzaghe, having previously been WBC Champion, he then got screwed against Ottke. A then undefeated fighter and a guy that was rated #1 or #2, interchanging with Calzaghe.

Eubank didn't matter that much, despite two courageous performances after Calzaghe which proved he was still a world level fighter.

Mundine? Please. Beating Green was a surprise, as much a surprise as Green getting a title afterwards but theres a reason he's running as far away as possible from Kessler.

I think you're confusing Kessler for Calzaghe and Calzaghe for Hopkins. Calzaghe hardly clinched past Round 4 in their fight, go back and review the tape. Ultimately he kept the distance and beat Kessler to the jab time and time again, When Kessler came closer, he got barraged.

Tell me, how with all of the clinching, did Calzaghe manage to land three times as many jabs as the guy with "one of the best in the business" who coincedentally also had height and reach advantages?

Kessler has a jab that did nothing for him against one of the best in the business. Lets see how Kessler's jab works for him against a Pavlik level fighter.

His speed, reflexes and stamina are world class, but no where near his prime, He didn't rely on experience to beat Kessler, he relied on fundamental jabbing and keeping the distance.

Something, that whether you like it or not, was diminished since his prime.

Kessler would have lost to any version of Calzaghe except perhaps one with two broken hands. Fact.

 

Right - I have more respect for his knowledge than I have yours, sorry... But your answer is besides the point. I am talking about he can sway the ignorants beliefs anyway he want.

So you are saying now that the welsh only opened their eyes for Calzaghe, when he beat Lacy? Oh, well - pitty. Still the biggest attendance, besides Kessler.

Yes, and? You can't blame either for wanting to let the ignorant US boxing world want to acknowledge them, and emphasizing on their wins, in Manfredo/Lacy, and Andrade.


Reid had a long and storied career as both a champion and key contender to the champions over a long number of years, something that neither Lacy nor Kessler has managed yet.

Well, we can only go by what we have. Reid never amounted to anything after losing to Calzaghe. He never beat anyone of significance even if he got robbed against Ottke, like so many others have. And he got beat by other boxers that haven't amounted to anything either, so... He beat crap fighters, looking good, lost to crap fighters looking bad. The traits of a mediocre boxer. He had skills, and he was considered a good SMW throughout his career.

No, but I can tell you this, this version of Calzaghe would not struggle against that version of Reid. Calzaghe is/was the superior boxer, but he was too arrogant back then, and almost lost.

Why do you say that Andrade was a good win, when you don't think too highly of him, because he got decked in first round against Mack, and haven't beaten anyone of significance? Don't you think that Mundine is a better boxer than him? Or are you going by media attention now?

I see... And let me guess, those who thought Kessler would win, were not of substance?

No, it is damaged in some peoples views, those who don't acknowledge that they were only in negociations of this fight, and Palle dropped out, because Braehmer moved up, and the opportune moment arose to get a title fight against Mundine. Unfortunately Mundine won't have any of it, and will likely be stripped, since Kessler is now his mandatory.

Lacy have shoulder problems. Or some injury. Alot of SMWs are trodding quicksand, unlike Kessler and Calzaghe, whom are the only worthy champions of the division. Miranda has the right spirit though, but is rematching AA at 160.

No, it is not. And no you do not. You lay it down as a fan of Calzaghe, that can't accept that Kessler is more than a fringe contender. And since you can't accept that, you do not know how to analyze a boxer. Go ask anyone, who is not a dane, they will tell you the same. Kessler is a great boxer and the best at 168, and Calzaghe proved he is a force to be reckoned with. It is plainly obvious that all you have seen is Kessler-JC and Kessler vs Andrade. Alot of people here both US and Euros have done much better research than you have.

This only portrays how well you think of Calzaghe, when you think he isn't even anywhere near prime, and still would beat a prime Pavlik. So what do you have to go by? JC has boxed like **** in dozen of fights in his youth. He has also had good fights, but none greater than the ones against Lacy or Kessler. Fights where you are saying he was past prime, and his experience don't make up for much.

But yes, JC will beat Pavlik soundly. Why because Calzaghe is still better, and more importantly - MORE EXPERIENCED THAN PAVLIK.

Shows you know nothing of Mundine.

1) Never had a amateur career.
2) Was an australian footballer, who turned pro
3) His great athletism, is one of the reasons why he is great, speed being the other.
4) He is improving all the time. He made rookie mistakes against Siaca - and there you go again. EXPERIENCE....

The last part is idiocy. By what you are saying then Reid is a better win than Eubank as well, since a younger Calzaghe beat him more decisively. Or Bika was a better win than Kessler.

How can you say that version was better than Kesslers? It is one of Calzaghe's worst performances.

 

You are still talking about the same Reid that lost to Branco right after. So going by what you are saying, Reid is in fact the best boxer that Calzaghe has faced, and Reid would soundly beat Pavlik, since he almost beat the best version of JC, while you don't even think Pavlik has a chance against this version of JC that you don't hold in high regards.

He hasn't been able to throw powershots in years, and he adapted to that. It's been a problem throughout his career. Would, Should, could - have you seen anything that shows that Calzaghe hasn't got great stamina still? Reflexes? He beat a prime fighter in Kessler, a top notch unified champ, that has more skill than Reid could ever dream of, and Kessler gassed before him. No, there is no evidence that those things have declined. There is evidence that JC boxes smarter.

Yet he made weight with a fair margin. Unlike Kessler. **** you are trying to grasp at straws rather than looking at facts. JC was in the shape of his life. He didn't just make weight, he made weight with 2-3 lbs. Kessler had to throw his drawels. JC never gassed... Kessler is a huge SMW also.

**** I give up - you are running in circles... and you have absolutely no knowledge. Kesslers opposition is only slightly worse than Calzaghes - fact. He faced the same amount of champs that JC had. He fought people with almost the same win-loss ratio that Calzaghe did, despite the fact that JC was WC, and fought the same "nobodies".

He didn't pull out to fight Sartison. He pulled out to fight Mundine, Mundine didn't want to, and then Miranda had other plans, so Sartison it was...Idiot, so it means nothing what they have done priorly? I can be arsed to debate with you anymore. I want to debate with you, but we must agree to disagree - because we are going absolutely nowhere with this...

 

I doubt you have any respect for an opinion which completely overides anything you put in play about your favorite boxer.

Ultimately, you regurgitate your arguments after they're proven wrong, this is why we're still discussing the Reid victory which while you don't think was impressive, still remains a victory over a recent world champion who was able to go on and defeat many a contender, including then getting robbed by a long time world champ in Ottke.

It's your blatant disrespect for Reid and ultimately your inability to see what age does to a fighter that gives you no hope in answering any of my points without this baseless repetitive regurgitation.

Did I know Mundine had no amateur experience? Check.
Did I know Mundine was a Rugby player? Check.
Did I know rookies make mistakes? Check.

Anthony Mundine had his father Tony, himself a very good boxer, training him from a very young age. He is not your typical "guy without amateur experience"

Notice how I never mentioned Sven Ottke and Mundine? That's because Sven Ottke was a world rated talent with a tonne of fights vs a guy who had only ten fights and no amateur background.

But his loss against Siaca? That can't be excused. But if you're trying to credit Mundine by discrediting his experience, only goes to prove that he wasn't really a big win for Kessler at the time Kessler beat him, especially considering the fact that publicity reports there after stated that Mundine was inexperienced, timid and afraid to exchange with Kessler.

Reid, until Hopkins, gave Calzaghe his toughest ever fight. Make of that what you will, Reid had held the belt and lost by a tight margin just prior to fighting Calzaghe and managed to go on and have a respectable career there after, beating guys that had they appeared on Kessler's resume, you'd be telling me how great they were.

You accuse me of ignorance when you believe Calzaghe's best performances came after Lacy? This is the funniest thing I think you've said.

Go on, regurgitate another nonsense argument.

The fact remains... any version of Calzaghe from Eubank on would have beaten Kessler on the night.

Rhetoric is all you have now, let me point out three of your contradictions.

Contradiction 1 - Experience

"Calzaghe relied on his extensive experience to beat Kessler"

"Kessler at 39 fights to Calzaghes 41 and had dominated top ranked opponents"

Contradiction 2 - Underating Fighters

"Reid never amounted to anything after Calzaghe and can't be considered a good win"

"Kessler beat top ranked competition like Beyer, Lucas and Mundine"


Contradiction 3 - Planning

"Calzaghe used the clinch to ruin Kesslers jab, that's why he was able to do it"

In reference to Calzaghe beating Kessler with the jab -

"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."


Contradictions are usually the folly of someone who can't make consistent points.

Go on, spew out more rhetoric.

Kessler doesn't rate in Joe's top 3 victories and ANY version of Joe after wining the belt beats any version of Kessler we've seen.

Fact.

 

An opinion is never a fact, even if it's based on solid arguments. I think your arguments are very good, but I'm not still sure Kessler is not one of Joe's top 3 victories. His next fights will help me to make my mind.

 

1.
Calzaghe had a long amateurcareer before his pro debut and won his title early - that means that Calzaghe is a much more exspirienced fighter than Kessler.

2.
Mundine went on to beat Soliman very desisivly (stopping him as the first ever to do that) and he beat Green also very clearly - same Green that went on to win the WBA LHW belt. Andrade went on to become mandatory - Beyer - well Beyer was on his last leg - no doubt, but he did come of a good win against Green.

As for Reid - Reid was a decent fighter - no doubt - but he was far from Kessler's level

3.
Calzaghe beat Lacy much much more desisivly - as for outjabbing Kessler - yes he did - although Kessler beat Calzaghe on the inside

*******************

As for the rest - you guys have far too much time.


As for Kessler's ranking in Calzaghe's wins - there is no doubt he is top3 - Name me a few other reigning unified champions Calzaghe beat?

As for Andrade being in trouble against Mack - go watch the fight - Andrade got hit flush moving back and went down for the first time ever (sparring, amateur & pro) - later in the fight Andrade got hit much harder without even blinking.

 

I haven't!

 

Agree completely, DanePugilist however was trying to point out that Kessler has to be considered a good win because he's so experienced and dominated so many opponents, thus contradicting the idea that Kessler was completely inexperienced compared to Joe

Soliman has been beaten since, Green retired having beaten Stipe Drews (not a household name by any stretch of the imgination) and Andrade could prove to be not too good a victory if he gets dominated by Bute, which is on the cards.

Kessler has to rebound from his loss and be able to come back against other opponents at 168, Reid did that.

As a plum, Reid was rated the favorite against Calzaghe.. Calzaghe was rated the favourite against Kessler

Aren't the fights that people expect you to lose, the greatest victories?

Which would only go to show how detoriated Joe Calzaghe is, because he's never "lost" on the inside before to any fighter whilst Mikkel Kessler has never really gone to the inside in any of his fights.

Joe beat him with basics, Mikkel wasn't quick enough nor skilled enough to repell them. Joe's basics like his attributes have all detoriated over the years, to the point that people laugh at his punching style for the "Slaps"

PS. I could disagree that Kessler beat Joe on the inside, being that Joe landed double the power shots and landed the only real punch in the fight that had anyone hurt ( the shot to the body) which was an inside punch.

But no point.

 

Kessler is without a doubt a top3 win for Calzaghe - if not the biggest.

The only rival fights are Eubanks and Hopkins. No other Calzaghe opponent comes close to Kessler in level or wins. Eubanks is up there due to it being Calzaghe first titleshot and a landmark win for him. The quality of the Eubanks that entered the ring is debatable - was he over the hill? drained? did he have enough preperationtime and so on - but a very good win for Calzaghe.

Then Calzaghe fights a mix of good and some ordinary opponents - best wins being Reid, Brewer and Mitchell. Then there was the Lacy-fight - Lacy was a good fighter a defending IBF-champion with a few good wins to his belt. A very very impressive performance by Calzaghe.

Then the big fight - both in terms of money, spectators and belts against Kessler reigning WBA/WBC champion.

And then Hopkins - a ATG - also a very good win - even if he has gotten old.

As for Reid being favourite going into the Calzaghe fight is untrue - Calzaghe was the favourite. Still a good win for Calzaghe - but better than Kessler - no way!

As for Calzaghe being on the decline - he doesn't have the hands of youth meaning that he can't deliever as much power as he use to. Kessler matching him on the inside is not Calzaghe declining it's Kessler doing good - Calzaghe had no problems beating Hopkins on the inside and Hopkins is great on the inside.

As for how the fight would have turned out had Calzaghe been 30 - I don't give a damn about these speculations - we got to see the two actually fight and Calzaghe was not over the hill or anything near that - but he was however up against one of the best opponents he ever faced.

 

Top 5 no doubt and I'm sure Enzo and Joe Calzaghe both consider Kessler in their Top 3 due to the amount of legacy they gained from the fight.

I don't take offense at Kessler being seen as Top 3 opponent for Joe, I just thought the guy was in a little dream if he thinks Calzaghe was prime to beat Kessler at 36.