u reversed the logic? wow impressive dumbness when its who you are defending, joe, who hid in fear until others were 40something.
You can hardly deny it. Dawson best wins were against 40 plus men. At 37 Joe was just simply too young for him.
deny that dawson didn't target men when they got old? he didnt that's what joe did. its the opposite of what you claim. again, you flop. but worse, you pretend you are right by faffing " you can hardly deny it" as if you had some kind of point.
What of course Dawson targeted old men. His best wins are literally against men in their 40's and he fought them when he was in his 20's. No way would he have fought a 37 year old Joe, maybe a 47 year old one but never a 37 year old one.
I may be in the minority, but I thought Dawson's win against Adamek was much better than his wins against Tarver and Johnson. :smoke
no he just happened to fight them. everyone happens to fight a few oldies at some point, usually on the way up. joe calzaghe targeted good fighters when they had turned old, deliberately turning down more dangerous opposition.
Dawson says -"I'm ready to give Joe the opportunity to draw the curtain on his great career in front of his family and friends and 70,000 fans," It was JOE WHO RAN AWAY (AGAIN). why you want to keep trying to win an argument that keeps you from winning? Because u r a calturd, they fail before they start.
I happen to agree eith you, but many of Dawson's best were against old timers. Just kind of ironic to point it out whilst invoking Calzaghe's name.
I mean I agree that Adamek was his best win, but that many of his other notable wins were against the geezers, and that it was ironic to have digs at Dawson doing so in defense of Joe Calzaghe.