sorry calzaghe your resume is weakest ever.

i like calzaghe...but i agree, his resume is weak, but he did be Hopkins, even if he was old.....but then again, so did Jermain Taylor..............so i dont know

 

why didn't you just title the thread "i hate joe calzaghe?"

 

joe didnt even look to unify until 2006..thats his 8th year as champion - was actually his 9th year!

Very few of his fights were against top ten 10 ranked opposition (top ten ranked by RING) - this is true, and a very good point often overlooked.

tito was just off the back of a big win over established MW joppy and himself had an excellent JMW resume - another overlooked point. At the time Trinidad was the hot favourite, he was 40-0 (34) and way above Hopkins P4P. He had become the 1st man to beat & stop Vargas (20-0) at LMW to unify, then KO'd world champ Joppy in 5 one-sided rounds at middleweight. That was an amazing victory and performance, beats anything on Calzaghe's resume by some distance.

Calzaghe was unarguably the less dominant champion - true. He never took control of the division he is said to have dominated til Kessler in '07- a DECADE after he won his WBO title. From 2001-2005, Hopkins was the middleweight division.

 

Because he isn't just expressing dislike for him, he is making the point that in his opinion, his resume is weak. You may not agree, but it is a perfectly valid viewpoint and has nothing at all to do with hate.

 

actually.....let change what i said, his resume isn't WEAK as a boxer.......but when you're talking ATG status and pound for pound best, and comparing him to fighters like Manny Pacqiuao, Bernard Hopkins or even a Miguel Cotto, then yes....his resume is very weak

 

Too true.

 

Another bull**** thread based on narrow minded U.S. centric fans views on boxing.

 

I'm British, I think Calzaghe was very talented, but after watching all of his fights from Eubank on, I believe he never fought enough world class fighters to be considered as having a good resume or being an ATG. No hate, no bias, no agenda, just my own opinion based on the evidence I saw of his career.

 

Hopkins may well still be adding a prime p4p top ten guy to his resume; even at 43. Joe beating RJJ now doesn't equate to much at all.

 

The thing is dude, I have to agree with you. My issue isnt our way of thinking its the sensationalist " CALSLAPPY IZZZZZZZZ ****!11!" mentality.

Who turns round and says that Roy Jones beat up 2nd rate fighters for nearly a decade????

 

no, just the 2nd best one your ignorant ass knows about. Study up kid, you clearly know nothing of this sport and have an agenda. Your opinion is worthless, JC is already on his way into the HOF, voted in by people who's opinion is more worthy than your biased hatred. :hi:

 

Calzaghe's resume doesn't detract from his skills as a boxer is the important thing to remember.

 

Hopkins and Calzaghe's resumes are pretty much exactly equal. Hopkins reign at middleweight was just as bad as Calzaghe's, the credit comes in the consistency they showed rather than top level names.

Then they each have their good wins.

 

edit

 

The thing is that it's only against top quality opponents you can truly determine those skills. For example how did Joe look against 43 year old Hopkins?