So who is P4P #1 now then?

You know what Sarah, I always liked you... :good

Flattery will get you everywhere with me! I am that insecure.

 

PS: Izzy Vasquez completes my top 5 p4p, but he is a long way back. We have a very clear elite top four in the world right now IMO.

 

Limited in what way?

I think Calzaghe is as far from limited as can be. He always gets the job done against any style, making the necessary adjustments to be successful on the night.

 

But it isn't as if he lacks in every basic area.

The limit of a fighter is defined in his performances. We don't make an arbitrary list and analyze how well rounded he is in every area, its far too subjective. The proof is in the pudding, if he makes the adjustments to each style he can't be limited.

He looks better against some than others, but thats boxing.

 

I'm sure we've had this conversation a million times so let's not even bore each other again.

The proof being in the pudding doesn't really work when the pudding is made up of mediocre ingredients.

Adapting from fighting Evans Ashira one year to the different but equally dire skills of Peter Manfredo the next isn't really showing a sparkling array of skill and ability now, is it?

Like you said Calzaghe has some of the greatest powers of recovery ever seen in a boxing ring, I say he has not fought enough top quality fighters to justify that, now you say he always finds a way to win, I say so would any decent fighter against the hordes of horse**** he has ploughed through over the years.

Wins over Kessler, Hopkins and at a push Lacy though we all know (or at least we all will after Taylor takes him to school) how obscenely limited he was, really aren't enough to prove the guy has ATG skills IMO - especially considering it was pure stamina and workrate that saw him through in the Hopkins fight where he was woefully ineffective to the point of impotence.

But hey, we can agree to disagree.

 

We were talking about how limited it is, no need to go off on a tangent.

At worst, there is no evidence either way of him being limited or otherwise. If he makes the necessary adjustments to win every fight, as yet nobody has come up with a formula to show up his limits.

The opponents are largely irrelevant. We can say that against the opposition Calzaghe has fought, he has not shown himself to be limited. Its like I asked you the first time, how is he limited? Where?

 

Actually, I suppose my earlier paragraph was a better answer than what I just wrote:

For me, Calzaghe relies too much on workrate, fitness, stamina, energy, activity, whatever you want to call it. He seems to overcome opponents on workrate and will, I don't see how he is a fighter of real skill at all, certainly not on the level of a JMM or a Hopkins. Had Calzaghe ever fought a peak ATG like a 1994-96 Roy Jones or a 2001ish Hopkins, I think he would have been cruelly exposed. Workrate and strength wouldn't have been enough then as they could have matched him in that department, plus they have far greater skills, power and accuracy. I cannot envisage how Calzaghe could have beaten either man at all.

 

see previous post

 

But you have really not shown where he is limited, because you can't. It hasn't been proven, because Calzaghe has always done what is necessary against the opponents he is fighting.

We can all say he might lose to prime this guy, prime that guy, but it hasn't happened and as yet he hasn't been shown up as limited. It's guesswork on your part, just as you look at the black and white of his resume, I do the same thing and nowhere has this been shown to be the case.

Maybe he relies on activity and physical attributes a lot of the time, but its up to his opponents to deal with that and they havn't. Calzaghe's limits have never been fully reached.