People slag off calzaghes opposition

I was just chiming in honestly without an agenda. I rate Calzaghe higher than most. In the end who you fought is what matters and he fought plenty of contenders, won a lineal, and eventually unified with other belts so the whole title situation is a moot point with Zags, really.

 

atsch Not another Calzaghe thread atsch
Sadly I have seen Mac mands previous thread and think he may have a bit of an agenda.
Here is all you need to know with this old post below

21 SMW title defences WBO IBF WBC WBA SMW titles,
- Kessler (WBC WBA undefeated champ) undefeated and not suffering double vision
- Lacy (IBF undefeated champ) Americas next big thing and mini Tyson
- Eubank one of the greatest SMWs ever and beaten at the same age as Kessler when Ward beat him
- Mitchell 2 time WBA SMW champ and only ever beaten clearly at SMW by Calzaghe, many felt Mitchell had beaten Ottke
- Reid who many felt beat Ottke, beat undefeated Magee who became WBA champ
- Woodhall who fought Beyer to a close decision, beat future WBC SMW champ Catley
- Veit (WBO int champ 45-1 only beaten by Calzaghe) who was only beaten by world champs or fighters who became and has a win over undefeated 27-0 Braehmer (current LHW title holder)
- Brewer former SMW champ
- Bika who nearly beat Ward years later
- Starie who beat undefeated future LHW champ Woods
- Sheika when top 10 and coming off a win over G Johnson
- Mkertchyan who became European SMW champ beating 26-0 world rated Chanet

Thats going to take some beating

- Kessler already beaten by Calzaghe
- Froch who has only won vacant titles, one being one Calzaghe threw away, the other being one a Calzaghe victim threw away and never beaten a top SMW
- Bika beaten clearer by Calzaghe
- Abraham coming off 2 clear S6 losses and done nothing at SMW
- Green beaten by old SMW journeyman Johnson, who when prime lost to Sheika in a box off to face Calzaghe
- Dawson who has no SMW pedigree
- Rodriguez whos best SMW win is?

Anyone who really thinks Wards on par and close to bettering Calzaghe is either very bias or plain stupid.

 

:good

Those links were bad weren't they? Not just of hearing of the awful news that he'd sadly died either. Even if he'd still been alive, he shouldn't have been anywhere near the top ten.

Also, what about the situation where Joe had to fight Veit again, even though he'd already beaten him in a round?

This is why I get on Joe's back.

He knew what the WBO was like, he'd seen the rankings etc, yet he was content to just keep facing his mandatories.

 

I understand your point.

You've listed some great fighters.

But it wasn't highly regarded when those greats had it, even though they themselves were obviously highly regarded.

Again, by the time Joe picked it up, those great fighters were gone, and the division was much weaker.

Those guys put the division on the map.

But when Joe was there, it had lost it's luster.

So Joe ended up fighting for a lightly regarded belt, in an unglamorous division.

By the late 90's/early 00's, it was a weak division.

I feel sorry for Joe, that he was stuck between the great Benn, Eubank, Watson, Benn, Collins era, and the Super Six one.

 

for a reasaon

 

I respect your opinion.

In the end, everything turned out well for Joe. He retired after a few big fights, and he'd got respect and recognition.

But he should have moved up to LHW much sooner IMO, especially when the Ottke fight was a no go.

He had a walking around weight of 192-196 pounds, and it was hard for him to make 168.

They were bigger fight opportunities for him at LHW, and he could have moved up their rankings.

But he chose to stay, obviously without knowing that Lacy and Kessler would eventually come on the scene and result in big fights further down the line.

Also, he didn't try and fight Pavlik in 2008. He said he didn't want the fight, because Pavlik hadn't done anything to warrant a shot.

But as I mentioned previously, he bizarrely then admitted that they'd offered him the fight in 2006.

Which left me scratching my head.

In 2008, Pavlik was very relevant and it would have been an easy win.

The question was, if he wasn't worthy in 2008, why the hell were they trying to fight him in 2006?

This is where I lose patience with Joe.

Why was an elite, 34 year old SMW, trying to secure a fight with an unknown, NABF MW champion?

This is why he gets a lot of criticism on here, from guys like me.

Because if the constant contradictions.

Some of his fans on here will try and convince people that he was desperate for the big fights, but he couldn't get them because he was a victim of circumstances.

But if you followed his career like I did, it was clear that he was more than content to fight his WBO mando's etc.

The Pavlik situation just confirms his lack of ambition.

Joe even said they'd offered Pavlik the fight twice in 2006.

Why was that?

Joe was a great fighter, but his ambition never matched his skills.

 

I'm not going to defend Floyd, I can't stand him. But he's been involved in bigger fights than Joe, and he's come through a lot of divisions.

Joe wouldn't fight Pavlik or Dawson, and fought a near 40 year old version of Roy, after laughing that he was past his best, and saying a fight would be pointless etc.

Why have you asked me if Hagler moved up?

Everyone's circumstances are different.

Marvin was 5'9 MW, who sometimes used to weigh in below 160. He had huge fights, and retired in 1987. He didn't ever need to move up.

Joe was 6ft, with a natural walking around weight of 192-196 pounds. It was hard for him to make the weight.

No, it didn't make Joe less great as a fighter, but take a look at these links.

Look at Joe's SMW division, and compare it to the LHW division, in the late 90's/early 00's.


http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_1999

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2000

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2001

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2003

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2004


That's why he should have moved up.

 

Here is an old post, but clears it all up about the WBO and how at SMW it was as new/old as the other titles and as legit. Also the WBO had the champs in Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe

Where you have written for the WBO vs limited competition.
I just wanted to highlight some details to you.
The SMW divisions first world champs were WBC 1988, WBA 1987, IBF 1984 & WBO 1988.
Now for a start it is a new division so no belt has any more prestige than the other as they were all started at a similar time. So the WBO SMW title has no less prestige than the others.
Consider also that the WBO at SMW has been involved in 4 unification bouts.
The IBF has been involved in 2
The WBA in 3
WBC in 4 also
This shows that the WBO has been as willing to make top fights at SMW as much as any other governing body.

Now look at the list of champs in each and who they defended against and you can see that the WBO SMW title has produced the best defences overall better than all of the other govening bodies in this particular weight division so far.
Consider how much critism Bute gets now for his IBF defences.
Consider M Beyer defending his WBC title against 26-14-5 fighter who was coming off of a win against a 0-2-0 fighter
Or that Mundine when defending the WBA title against a 24-13-5 fighter who was the same fighter that WBC champ Beyer was defending against above.

People bring up Eubank who helped mould the belt that was good enough to give T Hearns a slice of history making. Out of Eubanks 18 WBO SMW title fights 14 of those fights were against fighters who were, had been or became top 10 SMWs. One was a unification and another was against the undefeated former IBF SMW champ (relinquished his title). In fact 6 of the fighters he faced had been or became world champs

Then look at when E Morales was WBC SFW champ and he defended against E Croft who had been inactive for 3 years and was 1-5 in his last 6 fights with his last 3 being losses inside the distance, with his win being a SD against a 7-8-0 FW

Please answer if you think that is any better?

 

You can't say that because all of the organisations put forward a new belt in a new division, that they were all on an equal footing.

It doesn't work like that.


The WBC was formed in the early 60's.

The WBA was also formed in the early 60's, and had links that went back to the 20's.

The IBF was formed in the early 80's.

The WBO was formed in the late 80's.


The other belts were naturally more prestigious, due to their history.


If there was a new weight class made today, with a brand new organisation on the scene, and every organisation issued a belt, they wouldn't all be on an equal footing to the fighters competing for them.

 

fasileys lies exposed twice over.

yet still he will tell them again in a few days time.

 

I understand the point he's trying to make.

But the other belts were more prestigious, even if the weight class was new.

 

WBO belt did not become relevant until 2004. Prior to that, it was equivalent to NABF and IABA championship belts. Thats why I lough my butt off when Zags fans boast about his 21 title defenses.

 

Hopkins was 43 years old....keep bragging about that win....also had lost 2 of his last 4 dummy