Please Explain How anyone can have Calzaghe ahead of Paquiao in the p4p listings???

Hop is not a natrual LHW, he can fight there comfortably but his best weight is 160.....maybe given his age 168.

 

Not many know that about Eubanks...not many know that he lost his next two fights as well afterwards. Then called it a career. Still an impressive win for a yound JOE C, but not very solid.

 

Oh of course....Eubanks was the real deal and deserved respect in his prime....but as you stated what version did Joe get when they faught? Eubanks after the loss to Joe...lost 2 more times to a sub par fighter.

 

Eubank would have been a nightmare for any fighter in or around MW history, Marvin Hagler included. If you disagee, I believe you are the idiot

 

You need the watch the Thompson Eubank fights to judge properly.I had Eubank winning the first fight in one of his greatest performances,the second was only stopped becasue the doctor said so,both were very very close fights.He was fighting 20lbs above his noraml fighting weight against a guy who later went on to beat the now best Cruiserweight in the world Davis Haye.He was never favourite to win that fight,it was his last chance to get a title,but they still go down as 2 of his best performances.

 

Its no surprise it is only the select few idiotic americans on here who dismiss Eubanks as a C fighter!

Oh dear, get a clue.

Eubanks at his prime is an easy A fighter at middleweight. More talent than a certain Mr. Pavlik will ever have.

When Calzaghe got to him he was at the B stage, but still a solid and terrifically composed victory.

 

Don't get me wrong, completely agree that Eubank was a great fighter at MW and SMW.

Disagree that he was so past his prime that he was no challenge for Joe when they fought.

"Oh but he only had two weeks notice and stepped in place of Steve Collins"

He had been training previously, which is why he was in such tremendous shape on fight night.

He also had two VERY close fights following, one of which I felt he won and the second, he was leading before the stoppage due to his eye.

Then you have to remember Calzaghe also gave him his most comprehensive loss, I think he took two rounds on the cards?

It's your idiocy surrounding Calzaghe that means I want you to remove that picture.

 

P4P skill wise JMM is better Than Joe C... Pac beat JMM despite the stylistic disadvantage. Joe C can't even stop a 43 old guy...

 

You're on weak ground here.

Pac's victory was much closer (and more disputed) than Joe's.

And while JMM may be closer to prime than Bernard, he's nowhere near the skill level, craftiness, and ring smartness of Bernard.

I scored Pac the victor by one point, and Joe the victor by 5 (at worst, 4) points.

And age is not the sole determinant of prime.

Tyson was past it at 24 and Big George was still rockin' at 45.

A test will be how Bernard does if he has a NEXT fight.

 

PS

I like both boxers.

I have Joe 2 and Pac 3.

I could be persuaded either way.


And I don't particularly care for #1.

In fact, if he doesn't do something significant soon, I'll be trying to decide which of Pac or Joe is #1 and which is #2.

 

Eubank lost five of his last 9, one of those to Joe. He was a Cruiser weight, at the time, who had to move down at a few weeks notice to fight Joe.

Eubank was at his very best at Middle - pre Watson - younger years - and was undefeated there. Not at the drained weight he fought Joe. He was never the same after the Watson fight either.

Eubank hid from all the big American names and openly admits that. He's a great British boxer but never proved it on the world stage. That is wildly acknowledged, even by him self.

Eubank quit boxing forever just 9 months after fighting Joe; he was finished.

Prime Eubank, pre Watson - beats Joe though - IMO.

 

if we are talking about acheivements..it is very ****ing clear that it goes to pac. period. It is not about being undefeated and long time champ, so what if you're long time WBO champ? I could see the similarities with Chris john, erdei, and dzinziruk. Its about who you beat, who you fought.

If we are talking about recent fights..i had it as a win for marquez but that does not erase the W, which is the only result that would be written in the books. Do you people honestly think it is written as a R as for robbery in the books just as DLH's win over sturm was a W?:rofl

And pac having over the hill opponents...sure i could agree with some, especially the 2nd barrera fight and the 3rd morales. In fact i would categorize the 2nd barrera fight not that over the hill as barrera had a great performance against marquez in a championship fight. Oh and this guys are in their early 30's, if you call pac's last opponent over the hill then joe's last opponent is over the mountain:rofl

Yes you would bring that argument that bhop beat tarver and wright, so what? Look how old tarver is since you want to go by that logic, and wright a natural light middleweight who even went the distance moving up 3 divisions.

Ok, so about skills, it is clear joe is superior and perhaps far more superior than pac but its just the same as how mijares, guzman, calderon and a lot of other boxers lower in the p4p list are more superior than pac. P4P is not about skills, pac is limited but he gets the job done. Its again about who you beat.

 

dominant moving up?!?! when?!? has he fought again since BHOP?.. i probably missed it cause the last one i saw didnt show the supposedly better offense/defense:-(

 

Calzaghe is Welsh.

 

JMM and MAB are not Joe Calzaghe, completely different types of fighters and Joe WOULD outbox the lot[/quote]

I agree, JMM and MAB are not Joe C, because those two Mexicans are proven and class A fighters, esp MAB