Very selective history telling here...they documented the first Tarver loss and then the Johnson loss....then implied that that was the last we seen of RJJ for a good long while where they then went over the Trinidad bout....totally ignoring the fact that he lost another fight to Tarver before having two warm fights prior to facing Tito. Bunce then laughably said that the Tito fight proved RJJ was back to his old self atsch Now it's clear why they've did this, as they want to hype up the fight and to make RJJ look like a credible opponent for Calzaghe....however I'm uncomfortable with deliberately misleading casual fans as I think by doing so encourages fighters to make sub par match ups rather than the truely great fights that us fight fans want to see. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Were setanta right to do this or would it be better for the greater good of the sport to be more honest? Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Yeah I thought that was odd. They said "The next we saw of him was the Trinidad fight." I would have preferred a more honest look back at Roy's career. But they have to make the fight seem competitive.
Yep. Im a big Calzaghe fan as I think many people on this forum know, but I've always disliked Bunce in particular for misleading the casual fans and this is yet another example. I understand Setantas short term motivation for attempting to make Jones look credible and thus the fight competitive(which I think it still will be btw), but I feel it is to the detriment of the sport as a whole if the major TV networks accept these less than stellar fights if they think they can sell them. It just gives UFC etc more fire to say that boxing doesn't always match the best fighters up with another and I feel this to the detriment of the sport as whole in the long run.
Didn't I say clearly that I thought the fight would be competitive? On paper however, many would say that in the contenxt of what has happened since 2004, then Calzaghe ought to be hugely favoured and rightly is. I don't think anyone can deny that.
It should be a mismatch. Mind you, the Hopkins fight should have been a mismatch too and I thought Hopkins nicked it so anything can happen I suppose.
I dont think anyone thought Calzaghe vs Hopkins was going to be a mismatch. Hopkins is still a p4p fighter. Jones has been considered shot since the Johnson defeat.
I thought they didn't show the other highlights because Roy was on Showtime for those fights and Setanta only had the rights for the HBO for the show?
Surely RJJ with his record is both a creditable and a dangerous opponent? But as with all matchmaking - and of late Joe C has taken risks - you surely weigh up the opposition. Whether or not RJJ is shot is debatable; but he has taken some heavy defeats; so matchmaking maybe sides with Joe C. Then again, maybe (like BHop) there's one last hurrah - or to put it bluntly: get stuck the f*c* in and think of a great payday. Win win win, for RJJ with Setanta doing their bit to maximise sales and interest with the selective career history. I can't wait for this one - even the wife's threatening to stay up for it (that's my late night booze session truly goosed!). Enjoy...
To the people saying about Calzaghes have taken tough fights recently, I know all this and I think it would be fair of me to say I'm regarded as one of the bigger Calzaghe fans on the Brit Forum anyway. What I was saying is that I don't agree with Setanta deliberately misleading fans as it gives fighters a mandate to fight lesser opponents... RJJ was not the worst fight in the world, and I enjoyed the majority of it and found it to be a fun, entertaining scrap. However, it would be wrong for me to say it was my first choice of fight as a boxing fan or a Calzaghe fan: in the aftermath of Hopkins I called for Pavlik with Dawson a more distant second. Bunce further tried to mislead fans with his ludicrous assertion that Kellerman should not have asked Calzaghe about Dawson and rubbished his credentials for a Calzaghe fight... The guy is young and has beaten competition that would justify him facing Calzaghe without a doubt at 175. Utter codswallop that JC shouldn't have been asked about that.
