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

:deal

 

You think feather-flurrying would transfer well to heavyweight? :-(

I think this is a totally illogical, irrational, futile and obtuse thing to even consider anyway. Transferring/superimposing/scaling fighters or their attributes simply doesn't make any sense and is of no value.

Evaluate fighters in their own weight classes only.

 

Of course it is relevant when we are talking about heavyweights, and this is why they are very hard to evaluate in this sense compared to fighters from other weight classes. Look at what the author is actually asking rather than making your own criteria. He's talking about boxing skill and attributes.

Lewis had a lot of skills, but much of it hinged upon his physical advantages which were extremely well used. Being tall, having reach advantages and huge size is not a skill, its genetic and Lewis was fortunate to have an advantage Calzaghe did not. It has to be considered, Calzaghe is always fighting guys around about the same size as he.

 

You have to be able to use those advantages though.

Tye Fields, anyone?

 

atsch

 

Directly comparing the skills/attributes of a heavyweight to a supermiddleweight is illogical and pointless to the point of absurdity.

Compare their skills/attributes to others in their weight class - that's the only way they can be compared.

Put Lewis in with peak Tyson, peak Holyfield, peak Bowe, peak Holmes, peak Frazier, peak Foreman, peak Liston, peak Louis, etc etc, and Lewis would not be outclassed against any of them. His technical skills for a heavyweight were superb.

Put 168 Calzaghe in with the Roy Jones of 1994-96, or the 168 Toney who beat DeWitt and Barkley 1992-93, or if Hopkins had moved up to 168 between 1997-2004, and you would have seen Calzaghe exposed. He only looked so good to you at 168 because he was hammering in tomato cans for years and years, and the longevity has fooled everyone. The only class opponent Calzaghe fought at 168 was Kessler, who gave him trouble and Kessler was no Jones, Toney or Hopkins. And we all saw Joe's failed attempts to compete with the technical skills of 43-year-old Hopkins.

 

Calzaghe didn't land many clean, effective punches on Hopkins - most were taken on the arms or the gloves, the rest were slaps.

That said, Hopkins did himself no favours by faking a low blow and getting on his bike.

 

I don't agree he would have been exposed at all. We didn't "all" see his failed attempts, most of us saw successful attempts, and so did 2 of 3 judges and a good 75% of the forum according to polls.

Toney wouldn't have liked facing Calzaghe one little bit.

:hat

 

2 of 3 judges and 75% of people thought he outpointed Hopkins, but that is completely different from competing with his technical skills. Calzaghe was impotent, he won purely on workrate v a man with understandable stamina issues.

:smoke

Toney would have countered Calzaghe into outer space.

 

His stamina was so bad his output has not dropped a great deal. It looked terrible against Pavlik too :yep Calzaghe makes your stamina bad, he is a freak.

Toney is a static stationary fighter. He's waiting for you to be in the pocket or at mid range every time. Calzaghe beats him from range, and he gets in and out far too quickly on his feet, out works him. I'm not the only genius on here that thinks so :good

 

Pavlik didn't test his stamina, neither did Wright or Tarver. None of them fight at a Calzaghe-like pace. However, this pace was only a weapon v a 43-year-old. Had it been the Hopkins of '01 he would have coped comfortably with that pace atsch

I'm not too bothered by majority opinion, I make my own decisions. Peak Toney would handle Calzaghe. He was too tough, too accurate.

 

I think the answer to this question should be clear and obvious.

Lennox Lewis was the better fighter in every sence.

 

This and the Hatton/Calzaghe thread started out as a mature discussion!

Mostly trolling now.......

 

He wouldn't have been spoiling so much then and Calzaghe would likely beat him more clearly.

 

How has this gone to four pages. Isn't the answer obvious?