Sir Joe Calzaghe: All Time Great The Italian Dragon Of Hammersmith The Pride Of Wales

Very good fighter. great career. Could ve been much better if he took more chances. he sat way too long on his WBO super middleweight title.

 

he was a great SMW sure
his resume was all it could be at SMW, but look at the fights that he didn't make happen until it was past time

"undefeated" should raise more questions than answers in a sport where fighters get to choose who they fight and when. it isn't a badge of honor like it should be

 

:good
or just "way too long" letting war+en line both their pockets without chasing bigger fish

 

:good
love him or hate him, it's funny stuff

but the fact calzaghe had to wait until jones was broken before fighting him tells you volumes about how he let war+en run his career for him

 

I think it is you who lacks a dry humor.

I was saying it in a sarcastically insulting and self-boasting jest.

But no worries, Calzaghe fans, I rate him higher than most do...

 

So do I.

But Kessler is very good and he was prime, undefeated.

 

:good

 

I don't rate Dempsey's resume less than it is because he never fought Wills. I don't rate Bowe's resume less than it is because he never fought Lennox. I don't rate Lennox's resume any less than it is because it took him several years to face Tyson or because he never rematched Vitali or never fought a trilogy with Rahman. I don't rate Leonard's resume less than it is because he never faced Pryor... You judge what fights did happen and the performances in them. Not what you think should have happened or wish would have happened or could have ideally happened, etc.

Calzaghe did more than enough with few deficiencies or poor performances to be highly rated at SMW and discussed for decades to come.

 

Like most other posters I'll bicker with you, perhaps try to cleverly insult, or troll back when it needs to happen but I'm cool with every poster on here. No apologies ever needed here on out, CST... :good

"Sopranos PC types" haha, I don't even know what that means.

 

at SMW, sure
but fighters of old didn't have the 'financial incentive' to 'plan a career' that didn't involve the biggest challenges like calzaghe did

nobody in their right mind would criticize calzaghe at SMW, but the fact that he joined the 'euro train' of fighters who got rich without ever crossing the pond and testing himself there is the reason his career isn't appreciated

the reason why he gets more criticism than other fighters who did this, is that he was better than that, but did it anyway

 

I get it. And that's why he's no Tommy Loughran.

I think people who are looking to dislike or discredit just overemphasize the arguments against Calzaghe to such extreme that I'm sure they have to end up looking like a hypocrite in other discussions.

And I value staying in one division to dominate just as much or more than I do cruising through weight classes. I don't think fighting in ones' home country exclusively is as big of a deal as others make it out to be, especially when you look at the cases and see that he didn't receive any gift decisions and it becomes a moot point. And considering his best victory, over Hopkins, was in the US that argument isn't nearly as big of a deal as you or others make it out to be. It's like Ward fighting in Oakland. What fights would he have rightfully lost if they were elsewhere? (don't answer that, not trying to have a Ward discussion)

It's easy to point out the negatives in a resume. Calzaghe gives plenty of ammunition to those who don't like him. But one must try to be consistent with the degree to which each argument actually affects the fighter in question.

 

None of that here.

Sounds like a bunch of hipsters.

How does the phrase go...? "Call a spade a spade."