Pound 4 Pound... who is the better fighter ? Calzaghe or Lewis ?

Lewis wins on physical attributes other than speed and stamina by a mile. He also beat everyone that mattered in his time.

Clazaghe wins on skill, but he hasnt had as many important fights.

 

Lewis wins on everything bar hair cut.

 

I'm not sure p4p means a thing when you're talking about massive heavyweights.

They're bound to be much slower and less fluid, Calzaghe is roughly 2/3 Lewis's size...that's the difference in percentage terms between a light heavy and a bantamweight.

 

Joking aside, I personally view Lewis as being very skilled, both naturally, and textbook wise.

You could perhaps say that Joe has a better chin, but Lewis was a heavy, and being knocked out there doesn't necessarily mean you have a poor chin.

 

:admin

Surely this is a wind up thread.

 

FFS is this a Joke ?? !!

Lennox who destroyed every man he ever faced from Africa to MSG, from London to Vegas for several years - taking on all comers...

...to the slapper who beat a 43 year old and a 40 year old to 'cement his legacy' ??

Oh and he beat Jeff Lacy ?

 

Did Calzaghe beat Lacy? Come to think of it I'm sure I've heard him mention it once or twice...

 

YEs and what an amazing win it turned out to be.

Who would have guessed Lacy went on a 6 fight KO streak of all the other champs immeadiately after that loss to Calzaghe...

...oh hang on a sec. :rofl

 

You are making the monumentally silly mistake of comparing the attributes of a heavyweight with the attributes of a super-middleweight. Of course the supermiddleweight looks like he has better ability and attributes, because boxing in any division below heavyweight looks faster, more technical and more skilled - but that does not mean the lower weight fighter is "better", it simply means that what is required of them is different. If Lennox Lewis could dance around on his toes and throw 1000 punches per fight, then he would not possess the bulk or the strength or the power to defeat guys like Vitali Klitschko and Mavrovic. If Lennox Lewis could dance around on his toes and throw 1000 punches per fight, he could not be 6'6 and 250lbs. You cannot compare them in these terms. You must look at how good a heavyweight Lennox Lewis was and how good a supermiddleweight Joe Calzaghe was.

On those terms, Lewis has a vastly superior resume. On those terms, Lewis is an ATG heavyweight whereas Calzaghe is an ATG supermiddleweight - being an ATG heavy actually means something whereas holding a WBO supermiddleweight title for 9 years means you had success in a comparatively brand new and competitively barren division.

99% of the time I go with the man with the superior resume. I see no need to go against that principle here. Lewis is a greater fighter p4p than Calzaghe.

 

I was going to post earlier how I believe Lewis is overrated pound 4 pound.

Does anyone on here believe Lewis is overrated pound 4 pound because of the sheer physical advantages he had over many fighters he faced?

 

Your understanding of heavyweight boxing is non-existant Bill, that's why you have this seething sense of injustice, you don't understand.

The higher up the weights you go, the less size matters. This is basic stuff. A 120lbs man cannot KO a 150lbs man - it is impossible. But a 220lbs man can easily knock out a 250lbs man - that's why so many of the great heavyweights of history have been relatively 'small' by heavyweight standards.

Joe Calzaghe was fighting an overmatched opponent virtually every time he climbed between the ropes from 1997-2006, the standard of opponent was generally dire, so he had that advantage to set against Lewis's size advantage. Lewis was fighting the best heavyweights around while Calzaghe was hammering in tomato cans left, right and centre.

Lewis has the better resume, and resume is undoubtedly the single most important factor to take into account when evaluating greatness.

 

wow a hard question, id have to go for calzaghe as he has never been ko'd by bums, even though i think tey were flukes