Name a fighter at SMW that would have beaten Calzaghe the night he fought Lacy

you make it sound like Joe was a spring chicken. He was 36 when he fought hop and 37 when he fought Jones. **** Joe was slipping when he fought Kessler and Manfredo. Even B hop avoided fighting Joe close to his prime. It's well documented he priced himself out. Waited till he saw some slip in his game. And to say oh he was 43. Well pavlik, shot to **** Jones, pascal, and cloud will tell you differently.

Oh and I ain't no brit. I'm from the bay. Only racist stupid blind fux hate on Cal . He's a great fighter

Oh and he'll keep his O silly hoe. Just like Lopez and Marciano. If Mayweather keeps it going he'll be as well.

Mainly all the hate you see are from ass hurt urban fans and people who bet against him and lost money.

 

Joe did absolutely nothing in his prime to warrant a fight with hopkins or jones. Too busy beating cans in Britian. Why would two undisputed champions fight a can crusher in Britian when there are so many others available?

Prime or not - calzaghes biggest accomplishment is "beating" a 43 year old man , badly struggling against the only legit opponent he fought and getting a gift decision. No it's ands or buts about it. Black and white. In America it's black and white.

 

Trust me man lacy was never that known or that big in US.

 

If Joe was American you would be asking him if he would like you to spit or swallow.

GTFO

 

No. Juiced up jones in his prime would have stopped or won wide UD against calzaghe , hopkins in his prime also beats calzaghe.

 

Nope. You're dumb. Having to pull the nationality card proves it.

Joe Calzaghe is overrated and has a padded record. All boxing fans with an ounce of knowledge know that Calzaghe is a mediocre fighter with a padded record. Being undefeated is not impressive when you fight in your backyard vs bums for 95% of your career. He wasn't trash, but he wasn't exactly good either. Let's look at his "noteworthy" career.

1) Chris Eubank - this is not a notable win. Eubank was in the end of his career and a shell of his former self. And on top of that, a prime Eubank didn't beat anyone other than Benn - a decent but not great boxer. And he ducked James Toney cuz he knew Toney would crush him.

2) Jeff Lacy - A washed up version of Roy Jones finished this guy. That shows how unimpressive this win is.

3) Sakio Bika - a belt holder with no notable wins.

4) Manfredo Jr - another easy win. Not impressive

5) Kessler - he beat Froch. Whoop de doo who has Froch beaten outside of a washed up Glen Johnson, and padded record Abraham and Bute? (who have never beaten anyone notable) Froch also got a gift from the ref vs Groves and the judges vs Dirrell. Froch's win over Pascal is not impressive because Pascal was green and is nowhere near the same fighter anymore. And Jermain Taylor was a blind squirrel who stumbled across an acorn vs Bernard Hopkins, and did nothing since then. After his 15 minutes of fame Taylor disappeared quickly. So now that we established that Froch is overrated like his countryman Calzaghe, there are no notable wins on Kessler's resume either.

6) Roy Jones - of course when Calzaghe fights Roy Jones, Jones is a shell of his former self. Roy already got viciously KOd twice before this, and he was not anything close to resembling a world class fighter. And he still knocked down the overrated pillow-punching/slapping bum Calzaghe.

7) Bernard Hopkins - Calzaghe did not win that fight. He got gifted a decision. His father was screaming at him in the corner before the last round - telling him he needed a knockout. From the look on Calzaghe's face before the judges' announcement he knew he didn't deserve to win the fight. Then Calzaghe was extremely surprised and excited when he found out he got gifted the win he didn't earn. Calzaghe got whipped and knocked down by a 43 year old man. So much for Calzaghe being an all time great fighter. Is it coincidence that when a man with a padded record finally faced real competition that he had such a difficult time? No. It proves Calzaghe's incompetence as a wannabe top-level boxer.

I know certain sheep that are following the herd have prepared pitiful arguments to defend the mediocrity that is Calzaghe's career, and I will dismantle them here.

1) Calzaghe beat Hopkins legitimately - NO he didn't. Just like Oscar DLH in his fights vs Pernell and Floyd (in which Oscar clearly lost both times despite what the judges said), Calzaghe was the ineffective aggressor while his opponent was the more effective counterpuncher. Calzaghe threw pitter-patter slaps on Bernard's arms and shoulders, and complained about Hopkins faking a low blow (which he probably did) - while forgetting all the times he hit Bernard in the back of the head without being penalized. On no planet did Calzaghe win more than 6 rounds, and because of the knockdown from Bernard there is no way he legitimately won the fight.

2) Well on compubox Calzaghe outstruck Bernard - Compubox stats almost always are innacurate - even glancing blows or blows that completely miss can be counted on the punch stats as an effective shot, so if the compubox stats are your reasoning for Calzaghe's legitimacy then you are a fool. On top of that, matches are scored round by round - not based on who landed more overall shots. If fighter a breathes on fighter b that counts as 10 landed shots.

3) Calzaghe is undefeated - Calzaghe fought 44 nobodies (including Eubank). The other 2 were a washed up past-prime RJJ and a 43 year old man that he lost to, but received a gift. It's not about the number of fights you win. It's about who you win against and how you win. Brian Nielsen was 49-0 at one point. Would you take Brian Nielsen over Muhammad Ali (56-5), Evander (44-10-2), etc? I would hope not. Undefeated doesn't necessarily mean good.

What has been written is IRREFUTABLE, UNDENIABLE, UNCONTESTABLE, INDISPUTABLE, UNQUESTIONABLE, flawless FACT. Not opinion or conjecture. Not even the fact that Bernard Hopkins legitimately won (but got robbed by the judges) is an opinion. Nor is it an opinion that Calzaghe is nothing close to an all time great fighter by any stretch of the imagination. I challenge any human being to try and disprove the mastery of wisdom that has been displayed. Unfortunately for delusional Calzaghe fans, no one can refute the irrefutable.

 

GTFO. IM a big HOP FAN but his resume at 160 is filled with tomatoe cans.
Other then tito and Oscar what great fighters did he fight in those 20 defense.


He lost to jones. But aside from Eastman and an undefeated Joe Lispy you have 18 cans. His resume above 160 is a lot better. And he lost to Joe. That why he had to fake the low blows he need a breather. Couldn't take the pace

 

hopkins and jones are obvious picks

 

Hopkins did fight cans. But the difference is that hopkins did fight legit opponents in Tito and Oscar. Zaghe never fought ONE legit opponent besides 43 year old Bhop who got robbed. And his post 160 career is also better than calzaghe. Hopkins beats Zaghe head to head resume to resume and in his pre Taylor and post Taylor career.

 

Trash is trash. How many cans has RJJ AND B HOP FOUGHT? ??

JUST CUZ THOSE CAN WE'RE LOCAL DOESN'T MAKE THEM BETTER.

YOUR A HATER!!!

And your post proves it. I'm done entertaining your foolishness

 

A blown up ODLH AND TITO are not better then Eubank Reid Kessler Lacy Viet Bika.

 

Wow you're dumb

 

And yes everyone fights cans
But jones and hopkins also fought guys like tarver Tito Oscar toney Pavlik griffin Gonzalez pascal who are all better than joes gsrbage wins.

And yeah - I did mention griffin. That's how bad joes career is

 

ward beats him, end thread!!!