What would do more for Calzaghe's CV?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by ThePlugInBabies, Dec 8, 2008.


  1. ThePlugInBabies

    ThePlugInBabies ♪ ♫ Full Member

    8,674
    101
    Jan 27, 2007
  2. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    Depends entirely what Dawson did after.

    His resume now is not nearly good enough to stand up to a couple of defeats.
     
  3. BadJuju83

    BadJuju83 Bolivian Full Member

    3,941
    2
    Sep 19, 2008
    A clearer win over Hop would be better, but he wouldnt get credit. It would be a 44 year old Hop.

    Dawson by default
     
  4. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    IMO, a clear win over Hopkins because to me the first fight only proved that B-Hop is a significantly more skilled operator, but a win over Dawson would greatly enhance his legacy too.
     
  5. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    So you wouldn't just attribute any greater margin of victory to Hopkins' age and therefore fail to give Calzaghe any additional credit at all?
     
  6. jc

    jc Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,971
    14
    Sep 9, 2004
    Dawson. Wouldnt get any cred for beatin Hop.
     
  7. "A clear/clearer win over Bernard Hopkins. "

    Joe has beaten him. Two judges gave him 9 and 8 of the rounds. He doesn't need a "clearer" victory. Dawson has more chance in fighting Joe. Bernard has 0% chance.
     
  8. ThePlugInBabies

    ThePlugInBabies ♪ ♫ Full Member

    8,674
    101
    Jan 27, 2007
    don't be playing silly buggers now. you know full well what i mean. a clear enough win so that we don't have any debate and polls the following day as to who actually won.

    a fight's score does not reflect the closeness of the rounds.
     
  9. Brickhaus

    Brickhaus Packs the house Full Member

    22,296
    5
    Mar 14, 2007
    Whatchoo talking about Willis? Between the two of them, Calzaghe and Dawson have cleared out the division (other than Erdei). Wins over Adamek, Tarver and Johnson is a much stronger resume than what Pavlik had when he challenged Hopkins, for instance (and frankly, there's a pretty decent argument that it's stronger than Hopkins' recent resume, where he had an equally dominant win over one of the same guys, and his two other good wins were against middleweights who had to move up to 170 to fight him).
     
  10. sam_sunders

    sam_sunders science Full Member

    2,099
    0
    Jan 5, 2008

    bah - joe won by a very small margin, but he clearly won. no one really contends that.
     
  11. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    IMO the first fight showed that Hopkins was more skilled. If Calzaghe fought him again but this time penetrated his defence, landed clean punches, and won convincingly then he will have demonstrated his skills can compare.
     
  12. jc

    jc Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,971
    14
    Sep 9, 2004
    Hops spoiling tactics made it a **** fight, nobody wants to see it again, even if Joe wins a UD next time - which he almost certainly would. Nobody would enjoy it.:verysad
     
  13. BobDigi5060

    BobDigi5060 East Side MMA Full Member

    10,898
    2
    Feb 7, 2006
    Fight the young guy and grab a belt.
     
  14. bizzer07

    bizzer07 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,246
    1
    Dec 11, 2007
    neither, there will always be some young buck that hes ducking.

    i tell you what would be better, sounds silly, but a defeat. If he got defeated by say b-pop, and came back and beat him after, he would earn **** loads more credit imo. Everyone who joe will fight or has fight will always have a tag to them, whether its that there shot, or just overated, Joes opponents will always be labelled
     
  15. owell

    owell Active Member Full Member

    1,464
    0
    Jul 20, 2008
    Too late. He should have fought better competition ages ago...