What does Calzaghe have to do to surpass RJJ and BHOP?

El Cepillo · Jan 14, 2009

sues2nd said: ↑

Why Im wasting my time with you...I have no idea. I got the day off and am bored I guess. Oh well.

Time for me to shut you down...big time.

First let me get this out of the way...I AM A HUGE JOE CALZAGHE FAN!! I AM ALSO A HUGE HOPKINS AND JONES FAN, RESPECTIVELY!! But, what separates me from you is, I am a MUCH bigger fan of the sport. I was raised since I knew what tv was to watch boxing...my dad was a fighter (ams and in the military mostly), so he raised me that way. HELL, I have the spanish channels on my directTV so I can watch the telefutura fights...EVEN THO I DONT SPEAK A WORD OF ESPANOL!!!

Plain and simple, I bleed boxing...being american does not take away from that knowledge.

Now onto your "points".

You keep going back to this "he beat both fighters" arguement. It doesnt make any sense...we are discussing legacy here, not who beat who after their respective primes. If we were to look at it like that, then lets take a quick look at how we would have re-evaluate things.

Douglas, McBride and Williams would all be better than Tyson.
Berbeck would be better than Ali.
Joppy would be better than Duran.
Ibragimov would be better than Holyfield.
Willy Wise would be better than Chavez.
Mccall would be better than Lewis.

You see what I am getting at? It doesnt hold weight. Both are wins on Calzaghe's resume, yes...but it cant be ignored what state each of three's careers were at the opening bell of each of those fights.

Lets take a look at each man's resume for a second (I will do just Hopkins and Calzaghe, as I think even you in your insanity do not think Joe is close to Jones)...

Calzaghe - Eubank, Reid, Mitchell, Lacy, Bika, Kessler, Hopkins and Jones.

A great resume (one that gets unfairly knocked all too often).

Hopkins - Johnson, Jackson, Echols, Trinidad, Oscar, Joppy, Eastman, Wright, Tarver and Pavlik.

Another sterling resume.

Now look at the "losses" on Hopkins resume that you spoke of....but yet I have never brought up (even tho you said I did...:huh).

Debut fight...Hopkins admits a loss that happened at a weight he was not comfortable at (175), when he was fresh out of jail. Noone in their right mind considers this anything but a footnote.

Jones...one of the best fighters of all time, before both men hit their primes. No shame in that.

Taylor 1...most people feel he won this fight (myself included). This is the type of fight that is like Hagler - Leonard, where history has been very favorable to "public opinion" on who the winner was. One where Marvin gets as much credit for a win here as Leonard does.

Taylor 2...see above (I had this one a draw BTW).

Calzaghe...again, a close debatable decision by most. Calzaghe was the far busier man, but landed nothing of consequence...while Hopkins was not busy, but was the far better puncher, landing the cleaner, harder shots throughout...also displaying the better defense and dictating the pace of the fight. I had Calzaghe winning this one 8-4 minus the KD, but there were quite a few close rounds (all of which i gave to Joe on workrate).

Fact is, Hopkins easily could have Taylor x2 on his resume and Calzaghe himself. Hopefully Joe will give Hopkins the rematch he wants so he can answer the questions raised because of this fight.

Now before you start with that "Hopkins only beat smaller men" crap...let me break down what happened in these fights.

Trinidad - Hopkins was a HUGE underdog. Tito had just DESTROYED the #3 MW in the world (behind himself and Bernard). It also wasnt a matter of Hopkins losing...but what round it would happen in. Hopkins instead puts on a masterclass of boxing and Tito suddenly is a blown up WW! Funny considering Hopkins didnt even use size to his advantage in that fight, he just simply outboxed him.

Oscar - "Oscar is too fast, too skilled". Hopkins goes in and outboxes him, arguably winning every round, before being the ONLY man to stop Oscar (until Pacman). After the fight, those saying Hopkins would be outboxed suddenly turn to saying Oscar was the smaller man. Ignoring that again, size wasnt the issue in winning, skill was...and that Oscar actually OUTWEIGHED Hopkins in the ring (160-154).

Wright - Again, Bernard is the underdog...taking on the #3 p4p fighter on the planet. He wins...and suddenly its "Winky was 2.5 weight classes above his prime weight...ignoring that Hopkins himself was 2 above his...

Pavlik - Hopkins is a HUGE underdog going into this. Much like Trinidad, most people didnt feel Hop would make the final bell. Instead he puts on a virtuoso performance...and now Pavlik is one dimensional...Pavlik was 2 classes above where he is best (so was Hopkins).

None of that "smaller man" crap holds weight.

Add in that while Joe's reign as WBO champ for such a long time is amazing...it was that...a reign as WBO champ. He only unified vs Lacy...defending the IBF once and vs Kessler and NEVER defended that title (for good reasons...not a knock).

Hopkins on the other hand, was the UNDISPUTED champion at 160 and defended all of his belts quite a few times (it took time to unify fully). Any idea how many people can make the claim of holding EVERY SINGLE belt at MW? Two...Hopkins and Taylor after he beat Bernard. That is the list.

Also, look at the longevity. Hopkins is 43 years old (44 next week) and he is still considered one of the top 5 fighters in the world. Calzaghe hasnt had the chance to do that yet...and I do think he has the talent to stay at the top until he retires, but I think even he doesnt think he could sustain it for that long. Few fighter in HISTORY can match Bernard's longevity. Much like resume, skillset, achievement and h2h ability...longevity MUST be taken into account.

So to answer your statement again. I am american...AND I KNOW MY **** WHEN IT COMES TO THIS SPORT! I love Calzaghe, but do not think his legacy is close to that of Bernard Hopkins. This is not a knock on Joe...this is an observation, based on fact and history...not only nationality or media bias.

Again, fan of the sport first...fan of the fighter second. It helps alot when trying to be impartial.
Click to expand...

Fantastic post, I agree with 99% of it. :good

headhunter · Jan 14, 2009

DINAMITA said: ↑

Shite post. You think if Joe C beat all of those fighters he wouldn't get enormous credit from all neutrals as well as deification from his own fans, and the grudging respect of the Calzaghe critics? Grow up mate.
Click to expand...

You've only got to see the rewriting of history after the Lacy fight to see the point I'm getting at.:good

SouthpawSlayer · Jan 14, 2009

i agree with the time travel machine idea as nothing else will help him surpass either

sues2nd · Jan 14, 2009

DINAMITA said: ↑

How would you respond to this post then Rock:

Bernard Hopkins

To answer this question, I'll paste in a debate Beatboxer and I had on this very subject:

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

Trinidad, as good as he was, was a blown up WW though I do accept he was very good at 154 also.

Saying Trinidad was a "blown-up ww" smacks of agenda to me. I don't recall you or anyone else (that isn't a moron) degrading Monzon's wins over Griffith, Napoles and Benvenuti (the cornerstone of the resume of one of the best mw's in history) or Hagler's wins over Hearns, Duran and Mugabi by the same token.

Trinidad was a very big, very strong ww who easily made the transition to lmw and mw. If you look at his physical stats, he was huge for a ww, big for a lmw, and a perfectly standard sized mw - he was giving away only very slight size advantages to Hopkins on the night, no bigger than the average size disparity between any two fighters who are naturals in the same weight division, and considerably less than the size advantages often enjoyed by guys who are naturally big for their own weight division like Pavlik, Margarito, Williams etc.

In Trinidad's last 2 fights before Hopkins, he demolished unbeaten lmw champion Fernando Vargas (a big guy for a lmw, a powerpuncher, and also someone who may have been benefitting from performance-enhancing substances for all we know) and then dominated and KO'd natural mw and mw world champion William Joppy (a man who split his career between mw and smw, and who natural mw's Hopkins and Jermain Taylor failed to stop).

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

Furthermore, it could easily be argued that Hopkins resume until 2004 was largely mediocre with a few notable exceptions and is wholly comparable to Calzaghes during that time. I believe you have seen my thread on the matter, and that is my opinion.

Hopkins's resume was better than Calzaghe's up till that point, but only slightly. I don't think Calzaghe's can be said to be equal when you consider that:

- Antwun Echols knocked out Charles Brewer in 3
- Antwun Echols had UD'd Kabary Salem
- Keith Holmes had stopped Richie Woodhall
- Howard Eastman UD'd Evans Ashira

The general standard of Hopkins's opposition was slightly stronger despite his comp being from a lower weight class - and since then it has been a no-brainer I'm sure you will agree, thus proving (to me at least) that Hopkins's resume is significantly stronger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

After the Taylor losses, he dared to be great, elite. Wins over Tarver and Pavlik added hugely to his record in my opinion. However, Calzaghe has since recorded wins over Kessler and Hopkins himself, without losing as Hopkins of course has to Taylor and Joe. It's close, as I said when comparing the two but I honestly feel that Joe's win over Hopkins gives him the edge.

Gives him the edge on what? Resume? Legacy? Both? Are you saying that you think Calzaghe has a better resume? Seriously? Even for a Calzaghe fan I find that difficult to believe.

Hopkins Top 5 Wins:
- TRINIDAD (win & performance of the decade IMO, against WBA mw champ, 3 weight world champ, 40-0 record, world p4p#3)
- TARVER (age 40+ coming off losses jumps 2 weight divisions and dominates linear lhw champ)
- PAVLIK (stunning win & performance against undefeated p4p#5 KO artist, 34-0)
- WRIGHT (becomes 1st man in 8 years to beat the 'best defence in boxing' who was also p4p#5)
- G.JOHNSON/DE LA HOYA/HOLMES, pick one of those three

Calzaghe Top 5 Wins:
- KESSLER (superb win in unification fight, Kessler has not proven to be anything yet other than a very good short-term alphabet champ at his own weight - a bit like Pavlik in that respect - but he does look an excellent smw)
- HOPKINS (the crux of my problem with Calzaghe's resume. I cannot see how he deserved the decision over Hopkins who rendered him ineffective to the point of impotent all night. Calzaghe hardly landed a clean punch the entire night and won purely on workrate against a more skilled opponent who had obvious stamina issues at age 43. HOWEVER, even if you think Calzaghe did deserve the decision as many do in this workrate-oriented age, no-one can say this was a great performance, or even a good one. Calzaghe was outskilled and relied purely on workrate/activity/volume to rack up the points he did win, he did not score with any clean or effective work. I viewed him as a less skilled operator after this fight on this evidence)
- LACY (wonderful performance against an overhyped and severely limited fighter. In all fairness, a win over Lacy would be one of the fights in contention for Hopkins's 5th best win)
- EUBANK (the most overrated win in recent boxing history. Eubank had fought twice in 2 years before his fight with Calzaghe, two exhibition fights in Asia and Africa, and this was after losing to Collins twice. He was no longer ranked in the smw top 10 by The Ring. He was rustier than the Titanic, basically in semi-retirement before he got an offer to fight for the title at short notice because of his name)
- MITCHELL/JONES, pick the last one from those two (I see Mitchell as a vastly superior win to the shameful farce of the Jones fight, but I realize many do not)

Hopkins's best wins are clearly superior, and that's not bias, they are to any knowledgable boxing fan. I can only assume that a belief that Calzaghe's resume is superior is that while Hopkins has had better wins and has beaten more quality fighters, his losses drag him down. Fair enough, but like Ali's resume is better than Marciano's, I still feel Hopkins's is far stronger. His only losses have been to peak RJJ (who would have demolished anyone 1993-2003, he would certainly have defeated Calzaghe handily at any point 1997-2003 if Calzaghe had even had the balls to take the risk for a big fight and face prime RJJ), to Taylor (I think Hopkins won one and lost one of the two - would Calzaghe at age 40 have done better against Kessler??) and to Calzaghe (which enhanced many peoples' views of Hopkins's ability as he outskilled the younger fresher man but lost as he couldn't hack the pace anymore at his age).

In addition to all of these points regarding resume, Hopkins was the first man to unify all 4 major titles in one division, and he reigned as undisputed champion while also reigning as world p4p#1 - two things Calzaghe never achieved. He was also a superior fighter in terms of h2h/ability (2001-4 Hopkins beats any version of Calzaghe, as that Hopkins had the skill of the version that Calzaghe fought but was free from the stamina issues that plagued him at age 43).

In addition to Calzaghe's feeble resume which he constructed almost exclusively in Wales for 9 years from 1997-2006, he only unified in his 9th year as champion (a 9-year WBO reign severely damages his legacy surely), and he NEVER held all 4 belts at one time - he was never undisputed champion.

Also, Hopkins must surely be credited for his special achievements over the age of 40. Many many great fighters have achieved great things between their mid-20s and mid-30s, but how many fighters have had the skill and the drive to be still competing at world class level and confounding the critics at over 40 years of age?

Hopkins will be remembered in the history of this sport as a legend in the mould of Archie Moore for this 40+ achievements. Once he no longer had the physical gifts of speed and stamina (physical tools which the comparatively unskilled artisan Calzaghe relies so so heavily on), he has relied a lot more on just pure boxing skills. And what a historic and supreme job he is doing of it.

Joe Calzaghe has only really truly impressed me for one half of one fight in his underwhelming career (I am impressed by quality performances against quality opposition) - the second half of the Kessler fight. He was ineffective and unconvincing v Hopkins and great against Lacy, but Lacy was not top opposition (anyone who saw Lacy's fight with Omar Sheika would agree).

For the objective fan of boxing, there really is no contest here.

What Joe Calzaghe can do about it now

Build a time machine, go back to 1997, and instead of hiding out in Wales for 9 years, he could have the balls to go for greatness. But if he had done so, he probably wouldn't have the zero now, as he was never on the same skill level as Jones or Hopkins anyway.
Click to expand...

Tho I give Joe a lot more credit than you do from a resume and skillset standpoint...this is one ****ing hell of a post.

:good

sues2nd · Jan 14, 2009

sonny73 said: ↑

You could pick so many holes in this......

for example 3 of Hopkins best wins were against lower weight guys.Johnson is mentioned as a great win but he was **** then and got beat by Sven and Sheika who isn't even mentioned in Calzaghe great wins although he beat him easily.

As for the whether Calzaghe deserved the win....check out forums from outside UK and USA and they all majority say Calzaghe won EASILY and that Hopkins just tried to cheat the win.Calling Eubanks rusty is rubbish,you need to watch the fight and listen to what Eubanks says about Calzaghe.Calzaghe wins are all against real SM's.Hopkins never travelled and lost against 5 guys.
Click to expand...

My god your boxing knowledge is sparse at best.

Johnson was **** back then???

He was 31-0 and was a top contender at MW. Also, that "loss" to Sheika is questionable (go watch it and tell me if that was a KD in the 4th???)...but if you had ever seen it, you would have known that (I hate boxrec sometimes...). On top of that, he has been in there with some amazing fighters...and guess who he stated was the "best fighter he has ever fought, by far"? Yup...Bernard.

As for the smaller men arguement you attempted to make...I mean, did you even read his post or just see that it didnt agree with you so you decided to quote and argue against it??? Go read mine if youd like...its shorter...which may be easier for you.

:good

Rock0052 · Jan 14, 2009

DINAMITA said: ↑

How would you respond to this post then Rock:

Bernard Hopkins

To answer this question, I'll paste in a debate Beatboxer and I had on this very subject:

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

Trinidad, as good as he was, was a blown up WW though I do accept he was very good at 154 also.

Saying Trinidad was a "blown-up ww" smacks of agenda to me. I don't recall you or anyone else (that isn't a moron) degrading Monzon's wins over Griffith, Napoles and Benvenuti (the cornerstone of the resume of one of the best mw's in history) or Hagler's wins over Hearns, Duran and Mugabi by the same token.

Trinidad was a very big, very strong ww who easily made the transition to lmw and mw. If you look at his physical stats, he was huge for a ww, big for a lmw, and a perfectly standard sized mw - he was giving away only very slight size advantages to Hopkins on the night, no bigger than the average size disparity between any two fighters who are naturals in the same weight division, and considerably less than the size advantages often enjoyed by guys who are naturally big for their own weight division like Pavlik, Margarito, Williams etc.

In Trinidad's last 2 fights before Hopkins, he demolished unbeaten lmw champion Fernando Vargas (a big guy for a lmw, a powerpuncher, and also someone who may have been benefitting from performance-enhancing substances for all we know) and then dominated and KO'd natural mw and mw world champion William Joppy (a man who split his career between mw and smw, and who natural mw's Hopkins and Jermain Taylor failed to stop).

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

Furthermore, it could easily be argued that Hopkins resume until 2004 was largely mediocre with a few notable exceptions and is wholly comparable to Calzaghes during that time. I believe you have seen my thread on the matter, and that is my opinion.

Hopkins's resume was better than Calzaghe's up till that point, but only slightly. I don't think Calzaghe's can be said to be equal when you consider that:

- Antwun Echols knocked out Charles Brewer in 3
- Antwun Echols had UD'd Kabary Salem
- Keith Holmes had stopped Richie Woodhall
- Howard Eastman UD'd Evans Ashira

The general standard of Hopkins's opposition was slightly stronger despite his comp being from a lower weight class - and since then it has been a no-brainer I'm sure you will agree, thus proving (to me at least) that Hopkins's resume is significantly stronger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
This content is protected

This content is protected

After the Taylor losses, he dared to be great, elite. Wins over Tarver and Pavlik added hugely to his record in my opinion. However, Calzaghe has since recorded wins over Kessler and Hopkins himself, without losing as Hopkins of course has to Taylor and Joe. It's close, as I said when comparing the two but I honestly feel that Joe's win over Hopkins gives him the edge.

Gives him the edge on what? Resume? Legacy? Both? Are you saying that you think Calzaghe has a better resume? Seriously? Even for a Calzaghe fan I find that difficult to believe.

Hopkins Top 5 Wins:
- TRINIDAD (win & performance of the decade IMO, against WBA mw champ, 3 weight world champ, 40-0 record, world p4p#3)
- TARVER (age 40+ coming off losses jumps 2 weight divisions and dominates linear lhw champ)
- PAVLIK (stunning win & performance against undefeated p4p#5 KO artist, 34-0)
- WRIGHT (becomes 1st man in 8 years to beat the 'best defence in boxing' who was also p4p#5)
- G.JOHNSON/DE LA HOYA/HOLMES, pick one of those three

Calzaghe Top 5 Wins:
- KESSLER (superb win in unification fight, Kessler has not proven to be anything yet other than a very good short-term alphabet champ at his own weight - a bit like Pavlik in that respect - but he does look an excellent smw)
- HOPKINS (the crux of my problem with Calzaghe's resume. I cannot see how he deserved the decision over Hopkins who rendered him ineffective to the point of impotent all night. Calzaghe hardly landed a clean punch the entire night and won purely on workrate against a more skilled opponent who had obvious stamina issues at age 43. HOWEVER, even if you think Calzaghe did deserve the decision as many do in this workrate-oriented age, no-one can say this was a great performance, or even a good one. Calzaghe was outskilled and relied purely on workrate/activity/volume to rack up the points he did win, he did not score with any clean or effective work. I viewed him as a less skilled operator after this fight on this evidence)
- LACY (wonderful performance against an overhyped and severely limited fighter. In all fairness, a win over Lacy would be one of the fights in contention for Hopkins's 5th best win)
- EUBANK (the most overrated win in recent boxing history. Eubank had fought twice in 2 years before his fight with Calzaghe, two exhibition fights in Asia and Africa, and this was after losing to Collins twice. He was no longer ranked in the smw top 10 by The Ring. He was rustier than the Titanic, basically in semi-retirement before he got an offer to fight for the title at short notice because of his name)
- MITCHELL/JONES, pick the last one from those two (I see Mitchell as a vastly superior win to the shameful farce of the Jones fight, but I realize many do not)

Hopkins's best wins are clearly superior, and that's not bias, they are to any knowledgable boxing fan. I can only assume that a belief that Calzaghe's resume is superior is that while Hopkins has had better wins and has beaten more quality fighters, his losses drag him down. Fair enough, but like Ali's resume is better than Marciano's, I still feel Hopkins's is far stronger. His only losses have been to peak RJJ (who would have demolished anyone 1993-2003, he would certainly have defeated Calzaghe handily at any point 1997-2003 if Calzaghe had even had the balls to take the risk for a big fight and face prime RJJ), to Taylor (I think Hopkins won one and lost one of the two - would Calzaghe at age 40 have done better against Kessler??) and to Calzaghe (which enhanced many peoples' views of Hopkins's ability as he outskilled the younger fresher man but lost as he couldn't hack the pace anymore at his age).

In addition to all of these points regarding resume, Hopkins was the first man to unify all 4 major titles in one division, and he reigned as undisputed champion while also reigning as world p4p#1 - two things Calzaghe never achieved. He was also a superior fighter in terms of h2h/ability (2001-4 Hopkins beats any version of Calzaghe, as that Hopkins had the skill of the version that Calzaghe fought but was free from the stamina issues that plagued him at age 43).

In addition to Calzaghe's feeble resume which he constructed almost exclusively in Wales for 9 years from 1997-2006, he only unified in his 9th year as champion (a 9-year WBO reign severely damages his legacy surely), and he NEVER held all 4 belts at one time - he was never undisputed champion.

Also, Hopkins must surely be credited for his special achievements over the age of 40. Many many great fighters have achieved great things between their mid-20s and mid-30s, but how many fighters have had the skill and the drive to be still competing at world class level and confounding the critics at over 40 years of age?

Hopkins will be remembered in the history of this sport as a legend in the mould of Archie Moore for this 40+ achievements. Once he no longer had the physical gifts of speed and stamina (physical tools which the comparatively unskilled artisan Calzaghe relies so so heavily on), he has relied a lot more on just pure boxing skills. And what a historic and supreme job he is doing of it.

Joe Calzaghe has only really truly impressed me for one half of one fight in his underwhelming career (I am impressed by quality performances against quality opposition) - the second half of the Kessler fight. He was ineffective and unconvincing v Hopkins and great against Lacy, but Lacy was not top opposition (anyone who saw Lacy's fight with Omar Sheika would agree).

For the objective fan of boxing, there really is no contest here.

What Joe Calzaghe can do about it now

Build a time machine, go back to 1997, and instead of hiding out in Wales for 9 years, he could have the balls to go for greatness. But if he had done so, he probably wouldn't have the zero now, as he was never on the same skill level as Jones or Hopkins anyway.
Click to expand...

Dinamita, you're free to your opinion as we all are, but let's not pretend to be veiling them under the false pretense of objectivity.

Case in point: I noticed you happened to list every time Hopkins opponents defeated Calzaghe's, even though I posted 4 instances of Calzaghe's opponents beating Hopkins' in another thread where you claimed the same thing. It's a dumb way to measure fighters anyways, and it screams of grasping at straws that you feel the need to twist that in your favor.

Hell, I'm a Calzaghe fan who respects Hopkins. I don't care if you don't like Calzaghe; but as I said before, don't let yourself be deluded that you're being objective in it. Joe is 9-0 against current or former champs, for example. Not the greatest resume; but hardly a bad one.

DINAMITA · Jan 14, 2009

Rock0052 said: ↑

Dinamita, you're free to your opinion as we all are, but let's not pretend to be veiling them under the false pretense of objectivity.

Case in point: I noticed you happened to list every time Hopkins opponents defeated Calzaghe's, even though I posted 4 instances of Calzaghe's opponents beating Hopkins' in another thread where you claimed the same thing. It's a dumb way to measure fighters anyways, and it screams of grasping at straws that you feel the need to twist that in your favor.

Hell, I'm a Calzaghe fan who respects Hopkins. I don't care if you don't like Calzaghe; but as I said before, don't let yourself be deluded that you're being objective in it. Joe is 9-0 against current or former champs, for example. Not the greatest resume; but hardly a bad one.
Click to expand...

Your opinion on my objectivity is of little importance here. I have no desire to prove my objectivity, as no-one would accept I was when I am so heavily in favour of one fighter over another - as I genuinely genuinely believe Hopkins has proved to be over Joe Calzaghe. I have presented my reasons and I'm happy with my post. There is no insulting or abuse of Joe C in there, just pure sweet MO :good

DINAMITA · Jan 14, 2009

headhunter said: ↑

You've only got to see the rewriting of history after the Lacy fight to see the point I'm getting at.:good
Click to expand...

Did you see Jeff Lacy fight Omar Sheika before he fought Joe Calzaghe?? If you had, you wouldn't be going on about the rewriting of history. Because some excitable Yankee press thought Lacy was the new Tyson does not mean he was. Check out the Sheika fight mate.

Pimp C · Jan 14, 2009

UliUli said: ↑

What does Calzaghe have to do to surpass RJJ and BHOP?

I think he has a very good case in having already passed RJJ. But who does Calzaghe have to beat to be ranked above them all time?
Click to expand...

:rofl:nut Roy Jones jr is a top 25 ATG and one of the best H2H fighters in boxing history. Calzaghe can do nothing that can surpass him.:deal

catasyou · Jan 14, 2009

Sell out MSG masturbating.

sues2nd · Jan 14, 2009

thunder said: ↑

Sell out MSG masturbating.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few posters on here that would pay a premium for ringside seats to that!!!

DINAMITA · Jan 14, 2009

sues2nd said: ↑

There are quite a few posters on here that would pay a premium for ringside seats to that!!!

Click to expand...

Nallege would win the purse bid to be the referee, and would no doubt do a very hands-on job.

Achilleslststnd · Jan 14, 2009

DINAMITA said: ↑

Nallege would win the purse bid to be the referee, and would no doubt do a very hands-on job.
Click to expand...

But the purse bid would be an INSANE ESB NUTHUGGER EVENT!

They might have to close it all down afterwards for a cigarette.:rasta

rydersonthestorm · Jan 14, 2009

Pimp C said: ↑

:rofl:nut Roy Jones jr is a top 25 ATG and one of the best H2H fighters in boxing history. Calzaghe can do nothing that can surpass him.:deal
Click to expand...

if he beat dawson and adamek before he retired he might have a case

headhunter · Jan 14, 2009

DINAMITA said: ↑

Did you see Jeff Lacy fight Omar Sheika before he fought Joe Calzaghe?? If you had, you wouldn't be going on about the rewriting of history. Because some excitable Yankee press thought Lacy was the new Tyson does not mean he was. Check out the Sheika fight mate.
Click to expand...

So you had Calzaghe beating the **** out of Lacy did you well done.Funny how everyone does now.But before the fight it was just question of which round Lacy KO'D Calzaghe and now 3 years down the road everyone could clearly see lacy was overrated and had picked Calzaghe to win.Thats what I call rewriting history and no one was saying lacy looked **** against sheika at the time.:hi:

Log in or Sign up

What does Calzaghe have to do to surpass RJJ and BHOP?

El Cepillo Baddest Man on the Planet Full Member

headhunter Well-Known Member Full Member

SouthpawSlayer Im coming for you Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

DINAMITA Guest

Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

catasyou Lucian Bute Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

Achilleslststnd Guest

rydersonthestorm Boxing Addict Full Member

headhunter Well-Known Member Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

What does Calzaghe have to do to surpass RJJ and BHOP?

El Cepillo Baddest Man on the Planet Full Member

headhunter Well-Known Member Full Member

SouthpawSlayer Im coming for you Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

DINAMITA Guest

Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

catasyou Lucian Bute Full Member

sues2nd Fading into Bolivian... Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

Achilleslststnd Guest

rydersonthestorm Boxing Addict Full Member

headhunter Well-Known Member Full Member