Not Calzaghe bashing - But why do so many people think he's rubbish?

TBH, I think alot of it is because he was so damn good, plus the fact that he retired undefeated.

An old saying goes, 'Show me a fighter whose never lost, and I'll show you a man whose never fought anyone,' so I think people get the misconception that Calzaghe never fought anyone serious, they were all either old or were mediocre, etc.

To me, though, he always beat the odds. Lacy was supposed to have knocked him out, so was Kessler to beat him, and who would have thought he had a chance in hell against Hopkins?

People criticized him off the bat when he chose to fight Roy Jones, but way I see it, why not retire against the former best LHW of our generation, when ur the top man now? Calzaghe deserved the money fight.

I dont think he'll ever quite get his due, he'll be like Marciano and people dispute the 49-0 til the cows come home saying he only fought old men and bums. When the fact is, Calzaghe beat the best that was available...

 

Because he's a white boy?

 

Girl slaps.

 

More like Ottke; History is already showing this...

BTW:

Johnson, Tarver, DM, Dawson, Pavlik, Hopkins (convincingly), Ottke, etc...

 

• Cuffing punches. 'Slapping'. Lack of punching technique - (People don't realise he was a very good composite puncher in his early days before his hand troubles)
• Failing to fight Roy Jones Jr in his prime - (Roy admitted he wanted nothing to do with him during these years, Joe was also held back by Frank Warren)
• Failing to fight Bernard Hopkins in his prime - (Bernard & Warren agreed on a figure of £6 million, the next day he came back and demanded double, pricing himself out)
• Failing to fight Glen Johnson. Perceived ducking - (Pulled out of a fight because of hand problems, don't know about the other time, maybe it was when he had the Kessler fight lined up)
• Defending his WBO title so many times - (Probably the same people who commend Larry Holmes for defending his WBC belt on so many occasions)
• Perceived poor resume - (People don't understand he fought in a poor division, and as a natural super-middleweight there was nothing he could do about that)
• For battering American boxing saviour AKA the new Mike Tyson - Jeff Lacy - and proving everybody American and boxing expert wrong.
• For fighting Peter Manfredo Jr - (He gets a lot of **** for this, but it still got the American market interested in him. It was either this or defend the IBF title against Robert ****ing Stieglitz)
• Rematching Mario Veit - (Gets **** for that. Again, poor division and it was Frank Warren's choice. He held go back)
• For not fighting Sven Ottke - (Despite the fact Ottke would never set foot out of Germany, and Joe and Warren didn't fancy him going to Germany and getting robbed against a boring fighter who's undefeated but could arguably have 6 or 7 defeats on his record against some mediocre fighters)
• For not fighting Chad Dawson and instead retiring - (When Chad in his most recent fight for one, the Tarver remtach, showed us exactly how bad the arse whooping JC would put on him would be)
• For gettting the decision against Hopkins - (For people who can't see he adapted after a bad start and took 7 of the last 8 rounds and won the fight via decision, in Bernard's home country)
• For being 'over-rated', apparently, in ATG standings - (For people who can't see that beating every opponent he ever faced, having a pretty good resume with names such Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins, Jones Jr, Eubank, racking up 20 title defences and being a 2 weight lineal champion is a great achievement)
• For being 'over-rated', apparently, in H2H match-ups - (For those who can't see that a guy with great boxing ability, amazing stamina and work-rate, a very, very good chin, speed and the southpaw stance would cause anybody problems)

I could go on.

 

Mostly because he's good looking and undefeated and has good achivements. People don't like that. People would LOVE to see him lose and he won't. That is where the bitterness comes from

 

People go on so much about fighters from Europe having to come over to America to prove they are great. Has anyone really taken a look at the US boxing landscape here lately?

The only thing America really offers any more is a bigger picture, a bigger audience, outside of that, whats really in America to prove Calzaghe or Hatton or whomever it may be, is great?

I'm an American, but I have to admit, there is nothing really here in America for boxing as far as the fighters go. There is no real competition here in America, all the tougher fights are made in the UK or in Europe. Don't believe me, why is it that the last American HW champion, for instance, was Evander Holyfield [forget Jones and Ruiz, they were alphabet losers] back in 1997?

Hatton is bigger only because of the exposure America can offer...but that does not make him Mayweather and it sure as hell did not make him Pacquia. Its not a bad thing being #3, but it didn't make him the best of the best welters.

I can honestly say, Calzaghe proved himself the best from 160-175. Pavlik wouldnt have beaten him, Hopkins couldnt, Jones got slapped silly, who in those three weight classes could have beaten him? Winky? Tarver? Who could have, you know?

I guess I made my point good enough for it being 5:09am.

 

Honestly, as someone who bashes Calzaghe when the chance comes up, what pisses me off the most about the guy is that he was a great fighter, yes a great fighter, who failed to deliver on his promise. He could probably beat most anyone H2H at 168 but didn't prove it. If he had fought a couple decent fighters in their prime rather than waiting for big money against faded legends he could be a top 40-50 atg; as it stands he just left a lot of "what if?" That probably bothers me the most.

 

Because Frank promised to deliver him big fights, they had a good relationship, he secured Joe's financial future, occassionally delivered the goods with Lacy, Kessler etc.

 

Calzaghe was the betting favourite against Kessler and Hopkins and the RJJ fight had poor PPV sales and tickets were virtually given away to try and fill the arena, it wasn't a big money spinner for Calzaghe.

But back to the original point, anyone who says Calzaghe is rubbish or can't box is simply wrong, but the fact remains that most of his career was spent defending a fairly meaningless alphabet title against weak opposition.

 

So Chad Dawson dominating the guy that knocked Roy Jones out and beat him twice, some say 3 times, is an indication how the fight with calzaghe would have went down? Please please, we all marvel at that logic.

And you wonder why nobody respects his record. :-(