What did Calzaghe do to be considered as ATG?

Erm.........he wins, and wins, and wins and wins.

Oh, he hasn't lost a fight since he was at school aged 17, three years before he turned pro

 

Depends what your definition of ATG is.

If it's Top 50 of all time then No.

If it's Top 100 then Yes.

Seeing as the sport is over 100 years old, then if you can make the top 100. i'd call you an ATG. So for me he is. Morales and MAB wouldnt crack a top 50, but i'd call them ATG's.

 

He won a world title, and defended it succesfully for 10 years, establishing a perfect 46-0 unbeaten record. He won three more world titles to unify the division, and became the undisputed super-middleweight king. He then moved up to light-heavyweight, beat two legends and became a linear two-weight world champion.

Hope this helps. :-(

 

But if you take ATG as one of the top 50 fighters of all-time, then what you've written is insufficient to justify calling him one.

 

Who says hes an altime great ,hes a very good/great fighter.But people like Ali,Robinson and Duran are all time greats.

 

Thankfully where opinions matter, yours doesn't.

 

undefeated carear ,10 years as a world champ beat other atgs jones jr and hopkins, and beat world class opponents like eubank,reid,bika,lacy,kessler and others. people are jealous of his greatness

 

what? so 10 year world champs dont get even into the top 50 rubbish

 

I would say as a Calzaghe fan that he sits around 100-120 in the list of best boxers to have lived.....which isn't bad

The only opposition to his criticisms I have is the WBO thing.....it should be his opponents during his 10 year reign not the name of the belt that should be up for criticism

Catley, Lucas. Beyer, Lacy, Vanderpool, Woodhall, Kessler, Ottke etc etc all held the prestigious belts in the WBA, WBC and IBF and Calzaghe is considered the best of the SMWs to date yet he had the weakest belt with less provenence

The fighter makes the belt and I believe he was a legitimate world champion 1997 up to the unification bouts and is the epitome of the fighter making the belt

His quality of opposition and cuffing style draws criticism and those 2 reasons prevent him from ever becoming a true legend of the boxing world wide.....in the UK he has to be one of the top 10 though

 

I respect this...China hand joe makes some stupid statements when it comes to Joe...yours is right..I'd rank him around top 120...between 90-120...China Hand joe has him 1-20...thats crazy and makes his knowledge of the sport uncredible

 

He should never be considered an all time great.In my opinion he lost to both Rob Reid and Hopkins.Calzaghe would never have beaten a prime Roy Jones.Unless his opponent is someone like Pudwill or Manfreado you can be sure you are in for a tedious 12 round slap fest.If any fight he is in starts to look like it might be getting exiting(like the kessler fight)Joe reverts to whats worked for years.A thousand slaps per round and he knows that the judges love it and he is home and dry.Jones and Hopkins are all time greats Calzaghe certainly is not.

 

idiot!

 

Old news. Would the people please stop saying 'Hopkins won'.
You make it sound MASSIVLY contraversial.
The Hopkins Calzaghe fight is not -
Lewis vs Hopkins I or to a lesser extent
Gavilan vs Graham
Ali vs Norton III
No-where NEAR.

__________Total Punches __________Jabs ______________PowerPunches

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

It was close, yes, was it an OUTRAGEOUS decision?
Compared with:

_________Total Punches___ Jabs _______Power Punches

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Just let it go please.
Oh and just to add, his career isn't finished and you say he should 'Never' be considered an all-time great. HoF absolutley, ATG I'll reserve judgement till his career has ENDED.

 

I never said it was outrageous,just that i thought Hopkins had won it.As for Lewis v Holyfield 1 i did think Lewis won it but Holyfield certainly won some rounds,Lennox won his rounds better and the decision looked bad straight after the fight.But if you watch it again and score the rounds it isnt as bad as it seemed.
I certainly thik Rob Reid beat Joe which was also close,Rob was getting grief off the ref all night(some of it justified)but Joe was hardly spoken to at all.
I agree Joe should be judged after he retires.Id like to see him give Kessler and Hopkins rematches or at least one of them before he quits.

 

17yrs unbeaten, 12yrs champion, only one of two men ever to hold: WBC,WBA,IBF,IBO,WBO,RING titles in one division, beat Hopkins during Hopkins career best run.

He is an ATG no doubt.