What is the difference between Calzaghes and Pacs wins ?

This post just about sums it up. The difference between Pac and Joe is that Pac takes the riskier and more exciting fights while Joe takes safer fights. Don't get me wrong, Joe is an elite fighter but I can't help but think Manny has more heart and bigger balls when I look at their resumes.

 

also lets not forget how bad delahoya looked in the forbes fight and how jones looked impressive in his fight with trinidad.

 

GREAT POST!!!!

Then after the fight, some members call DLH SHOT!!!!!

After PAC schooled DLH for 8 ROUNDS he will look shot but he ain't SHOT!!!

 

Mainly the difference is that JONES coming back to boxing caused outrage already. Most of em saying that he should stay retired. This was because he's been destroyed by Tarver already, and hasn't really recovered. DLH on the other hand just fought PBF to an SD, and recently won his last fight. PAC jumps 2 divisions higher.

 

i dont like criticisng fighters but DLH looked really bad, somone in his camp needs to tell him to get hungry or retire

 

DLH didn't look great against Forbes, which is one of the reasons why I picked Pac to win. However, he still has a huge size advantage over Pac. Jones easily beat Tito. However, Tito hadn't fought in almost 2 years, was fat at 170 and several weights above his prime. That Jones couldn't stop him, and early, tells us how shot Jones was at the time. It is not a good win.

 

2 basically retired fighters coming back to fight does not mean you're still competitive. If you put in FOREMAN and FRAZIER in the ring now, and FOREMAN massacres him in 5 rds. does it mean he stands a chance against Vlad now? or Haye?

 

stonerose i agree with everything you have said in this thread.

1} You either give both Pacman and Calzaghe credit for their wins over shot fighters or you give neither credit.

2} If posters think that Pacmans victory was slightly better fine, but both these fights are in the same ballpark, therefore both get credit or neither get credit.

3} A lot of people have been pointing out that Manny was the underdog to win against DLH,
this is a negative for the pro Pacman fanboys, it simply means that the experts that compile the odds {and also the betting public otherwise the odds would change} thought
that Manny was not that good {by definition, figuratively speaking} and lose.
To be made favourite is a feather in the cap of a boxer, to be the underdog means that the experts expect you to lose ! , even with Manny upsetting the odds it is not proof of greatness infact it is a negative, in this case it gives greater weight to the DLH was shot debate.
Just because Calzaghe was favourite to win his last fight and Pacman was the underdog has got nothing to do with the fact that both boxers deserve praise for their wins !

 

Pac man had the guts to take the fight against the much bigger dangerous man, who recently gave the p4p no1 a run for his money, and it looked like pac was on a beating to nothing. Calzaghe took the fight with a known to be totally shot Jones, because it was an easy option. There is a world of difference between the mentality here and for that alone pac deserves far, far, greater credit - Calzaghe deserves none for the RJJ fight.

 

Honestly you have to ask the question 'was Delahoya that old or did Pacman just make him look that old'? Saying he looked shot because Pacman beat him so thoroughly isn't fair.

I think your trying to make Calzaghe look better by drawing this comparison. The fact is on numerous occasions Calzaghe has said things like:

'Jones used to be a great fighter, he isn't a great fighter anymore'
'I wouldn't fight a washed up fighter like Jones'
Thats from the horses mouth.
Thats not even looking at the fact he was 0-3 against ranked opposition in his previous fights (Tito wasnt ranked) and brutally KO'd twice AND 39.

Oscar went to a SD against Mayweather, blew out belt holder Mayorga and shutout Forbes better than . You posted a pic of Oscar on his stool and claim he looked shot/out of shape. Oscar has never had a that low bodyfat, has he always been shot?

Then saying 'I want to give both fighters credit'. Well ok do you at least accept Pacquaio's win is far better with Delahoya being far nearer to his prime than Jones? And ofcourse Pacquaio jumping 3weight classes in a year to fight Delahoya? Not to mention Pacman was far more dominant

I don't think you'll answer any of those questions. And for the record I'm not American and neither is Pacman (I'm British).

 

thats abit harsh. RJJ is not as bad as everyone thinks or is making out and RJJ did much better than DLH did.