No Way Would Pac Beat Calzaghe If They Were the Same Size!!

This is " THE ANSWER " all of you should base your comments on before posting !! :good

I see Pacman ahead of Calzaghe...not because he's better than Calzaghe in the ring, but rather because he did more achievement wise against more quality opponents than Calzaghe did, at this point in time !!

 

Calzaghe should have fought more quality opposition at their best, just like he did with Kessler ! But besides Kessler..I don't see much else to make him so incredible achievement wise in regards to the P4P rankings.

 

agree 100%.

joe calzaghe is a good fighter but that is it. Its embarassing to the sport to call him an ATG. Unbeaten record doesn't mean **** when you fights bums n over the hill fighters. On the other hand...pacman will be a ATG when he retires for sure.

 

I can't believe people are actually doubting that Pacman is better than Calzaghe in the ring. wtf?

 

I was only really impressed once by Calzaghe and it's the way he adapted against Kessler ! I'm biased when comparing talents between Pacman and Calzaghe cause I don't like a boxer that just slaps like Joe...

 

LOL People think cuz Joe has beaten two old timers who have been in real fights in their prime while Joe was fighting mostly no bodies he is the best fighter in the world LOL. I mean Joe is not even the best LH, Young Dawson would break Joe's big nose in the 1st round and KO him later on in the fight. The old timers both knocked Joe down in the 1st but did not have the will to finish him off and let him off the hook, again young Dawson would not let him off the hook and KO JOE.
:hi:

 

Excellent :good

 

forum is full of idiots

 

ESB - STOP!!!

EVERYONE STOP MAKING COMMENTS LIKE "IF THEY WERE THE SAME SIZE, CALZAGHE WOULD BEAT PACQUIAO AND VICE-VERSA" - STOP!

IT MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER AND MAKES US ALL LOOK STUPID.

PLEASE READ ON FOR THE GOOD OF US ALL....

Because it's both boring and tiring having to continually type out explanations to help people who shouldn't be on here setting the world to rights with their arrogant and ill-informed opinions when they don't even know what they are talking about. Yawn. Here goes for the 3000th time....

This thread is not directed at telling knowledgable boxing fans what they already know fine well, it is for helping guys who are on this forum taking part in pound-for-pound and head-to-head discussions, when it is clear they do not know what either term means.

Over the past few weeks, more and more I have seen pound-for-pound being worked out on this basis:
p4p = h2h / weight
This is wrong, wrong to the point of ludicrous.

Do you mean to tell me that when deciding if Lennox Lewis should be placed higher than Ricardo Lopez p4p, you either imagine a 5ft 4in and 7 stone Lennox Lewis fighting Lopez, or a 6ft 5in and 17 stone Ricardo Lopez fighting Lewis??

I am honestly not being rude, but I have no idea where people get this idea from, but it absolutely is NOT what pound-for-pound is, the very idea is psychopathic!!!!

If you imagine that you so so radically change the size of a boxer for a fight, then he completely loses exactly what made him the fighter he is- this CANNOT be done, it makes no sense whatsoever. Of course you are going to think Shane Mosley would box rings round Lennox Lewis because he would be much faster and has better skills etc, but that is only because by nature, a lightweight needs those attributes to compete at

This content is protected

level. A heavyweight does not. He needs bulk and strength and power. If you imagine Mosley to be a heavyweight then at 16st, he cannot be that same quicksilver mover and puncher, so he is then a completely different fighter. If you imagine Lewis to be a lightweight, you can't imagine a 5ft 7in 135lbs guy standing flat-footed and lining up head shots, as that is not what a lightweight could ever do.

You can determine who was better between current and past fighters by H2H- if they fought at the same weight. You can decide who was better between Hagler and Monzon by imagining what you think would happen if they fought, because then you aren't changing anything about them, you're just taking both men and putting them in the ring.

But to decide properly pound-for-pound who was better, the way you work this out is by looking at how they performed against the men they fought, how much better they were than the best fighters in their weight division at the time.

Example: In my opinion, Roberto Duran is a better fighter pound-for-pound than Joe Frazier. I think this because Duran showed he was better than the best fighters he fought by a greater margin than Frazier was. Duran at lightweight got the better of everyone he fought, looked far far better than most of the guys he fought, and he fought many great fighters and took on many difficult and dangerous challenges, and did this more regularly and with greater ease than Frazier did.
I do not think this because if I blew up Duran to 16st or shrunk Frazier down to 135lbs, Duran would win a fight between them, because by definition this is impossible.

It's the same as saying I think Laila Ali is better p4p than Roy Jones Jr, because if you imagine Ali as a man, she would win a fight between the two. But she isn't a man! And obviously imagining her as a man (aside from being very very wrong!) would completely change the fighter she is!!
___________________________________________________________


OK, so that was my explanation for h2h/weight not having any relevance or meaning or significance in boxing, and hopefully the many people who have commented in this thread will see how ridiculous considering a light-heavyweight fighting a lightweight is.

To further prove the point about pound-for-pound not being h2h/weight, I refer you to the Wikipedia definition of the term:

Pound-for-pound is the term used in

This content is protected

,

This content is protected

and other

This content is protected

to describe a fighter's value in relation to fighters of different weight classes.
It is often said to have been created to describe

This content is protected

This content is protected

and

This content is protected

champion

This content is protected

.

This content is protected

Robinson is one of the most accomplished fighters of all time, but his supporters realized that, while he could beat anyone in his own class, as a Middleweight he would not be able to beat a top

This content is protected

. Hence, Robinson was called the pound-for-pound best without being expected to beat much larger fighters, under the belief that he as a Middleweight was still a better quality fighter than any fighter fighting at heavier or lighter weights than him.

To put it in my own words as simply as possible:

Pound-for-pound is for deciding who is BETTER between two boxers, not who would WIN.

H2H is for deciding who would WIN between two boxers.

Pound-for-pound can be used to decide between ANY two fighters at any weights, because you are rating them on how good they were at their own weight and their overall greatness, it has nothing to do with H2H unless the two fighters in question fought at the same weight.





I would like to have not come across as arrogant and patronising in this post, but I know I probably have, I'm just sick to death of these moronic conversations about how Calzaghe would beat Pacquiao if they were the same weight, and my extreme boredom and intolerance of this utter dog**** probably shone through. If so, I apologize. I hope this post has been of some help to some posters.

:good

 

that long ass post is boring as hell.

Who is better P4P = Who is the better fighter

and thats all there is to it.

 

in that case - thread starter changes it to a "style matchup" rather than a p4p discussion - and then there is no problems. Also - remember that is your opinion and interpretation - not cold hard fact. it's a decent interpretation - with lots of good points with solid backing for your reasons - fair play. it is not the only interpretation and others are allowed to theirs. remember that. they're not moronic for thinking this - but they should be able to at least provide some form of backing for their opinions.

fair?

 

No it isn't though.

 

No, completely unfair and ridiculous.

A "style match-up" between a 175lbs man and a 135lbs man would be a blow-out, irrespective of style. If you change their sizes to make them the same size, then you completely change what the fighter is actually like, thus rendering it completely futile and meaningless.

This simply cannot be done. If you want to continue talking about it be my guest, but it's ****ing laughable.

My "interpretation" is not opinion, it is my representation of the fact - that IS what pound-for-pound is and how it is worked out, it is not open to debate, it is what it is.

 

He ain`t NEVER been smoked,unlike Pacquio. JC loves these crude sluggers. Joe beats his ass badly. :hi:

 

The dire lack of brain cells on this thread really is painful to observe.