Who do you rank higher: Andre Ward or Joe Calzaghe

It is isn't it? Lol Calzaghe won his fights by dominating and overwhelming his opponents within the rules of the ring.

 

Was Roy coming off of one of his most impressive performances though, having annihilated a fighter who was widely considered to be one of the most durable fighters out there?

The only thing the Mosley that Floyd and the RJJ that Calzaghe fought had in common is being at the same age at the time of the fights. The comprasion ends there.

 

What's with all this "troll" sh!t? I see people using that all the time here. I feel like I'm posting to a bunch of Harry Potter fanatics instead of boxing fans.

Of course you can't rate someone's career based on name value alone. That's why I mentioned depth and substance in a resume that supports a strong legacy.

It does matter that Roy is an ATG, just because he was past his prime, doesn't mean he isn't a quality name to have on your resume. Was Joe Louis or Jersey Joe meaningless to Marciano's legacy? Or what about Shane or DLH to Floyd's?

We can split hairs about the passing of the torch kinds of fights where a younger fighter takes on the older, faded legend and wins. It's part of boxing. Always has and always will be. We can't discredit the victories whenever it suits one particular agenda or another. It has to be accepted and analyzed appropriately when evaluating the careers of these fighters in totality.

I totally agree that Ward's wins over Kovalev and Froch is better than Joe's win over Jones and Eubanks, but overall, Joe ruled his era and dominated more consistently and comprehensively than Froch or Ward in theirs. The weight Joe's resume and ring accomplishments carry better through an historical lens

 

I think Ward has the better resume. Joe never heat a world class fighter in their prime, Kessler was about as close as he got but nothing comparable to Wards wins over Sergey.

 

Decent. Not wide or a crazy amount...decent. The level is fairly similar comparing the eras side by side. Neither were incredibly talent rich but they were both "decent".

If you say it's close....I have no arguments. They both have very good legacies which are supported by their strong resumes and ring accomplishments

 

Nobody knows exactly what would have happened, and we're all entitled to our own opinions. But if you're going to be sensible and objective, you take as much evidence as you possibly can, before then making an educated guess. That's all you can do. Look at their styles, look at their opponents, look at the manner of their victories etc, and then try and be as logical as possible in offering your opinion.

I could say that I think Amir Khan would have beaten Ray Leonard. And nobody could prove me wrong. Because it wouldn't be possible. That would be my opinion. Yet, nobody would respect it for various reasons.

Again, did Joe toy with any elite fighters? No he didn't.

Did he toy with any fighters who shared similarities with Andre Ward? No he didn't.

He didn't toy with Reid, Kessler, Bika or Hopkins. Those guys possessed skill, toughness and spoiling tactics etc. Now did Joe have 4 off nights, or were they just genuinely tough match ups for him?

Again, yes, you're entitled to your opinion. No, I can't prove that you'd be wrong. But looking at the evidence that's to hand, your opinion simply carries no weight. If he couldn't toy with those guys like they were nothing, then why do you think he would have toyed with Andre like he was nothing? It's bizarre. You've said yourself that Joe beat a similar fighter in Bernard. Yet that was one of Joe's hardest fights. Yet you're saying Andre would have been one of his easiest. Why?

We know that you hate Andre and you would have loved to have seen Joe school him. Fine. But have a serious think about how realistic that would have been.

Joe could definitely have beaten him. I can envisage it myself. But it's pure ignorance to think he'd have beaten him like he was nothing, when again, he struggled with lesser fighters who shared similarities.

Vote with your head and not with your heart.

 

Roy was clearly finished as a top level fighter.

He'd done nothing for 5 years prior, and he didn't do anything afterwards.

Although Evander was faded, he was still a top level HW.

 

It only looks good to casual fans.

For any knowledgeable fan it means nothing.

Glen Johnson doesn't get a lot of credit for beating Roy so why would Joe? Especially when in 2007, he said:

"I've no more interest in Roy Jones. He's no longer a great fighter"

"I've no interest in Tarver. All he did was beat a shot Jones, and Johnson did the same"

Joe's wins over Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins were much more meaningful.

 

Yeah, but you're putting forward Roy and Eubank's name as evidence to support your theory that Joe has a better resume.

 

What facts?


I'll give you some facts:

It's a fact that Joe never destroyed any elite fighters.

It's a fact that Joe didn't destroy lesser fighters than Andre who shared similarities with him.

 

Did you just call prime Kessler not World Class? As for this prime thing, I personally think Kovalev has been slipping for the past year, since the Chilemba fight.

 

I labelled you as a troll because what you've wrote is silly, and this site is flooded with them.

If you're not, then I apologise.


Again, you have used the names of Roy, Bernard and Eubank as a form of evidence to support your theory that Joe has a better resume.

You have said that Joe has 3 ATG's on his resume, and Andre will only have 1 when Kovalev retires.

Yet when you break everything down, despite those fighters being ATG's (probably not Eubank) then those wins don't trump the wins of Andre's. So it was silly of you to write that.

How can a shot version of Roy be a quality win? A quality name, yeah. But Amir Khan's got MAB on his record. It may look good on BoxRec, but not when you're having an intelligent debate with knowledgeable posters.

Yes, Joe did dominate his era more. But at the same time, you could argue that that's because he wasn't ambitious. He squeezed himself down from almost 200 pounds, to defend a lightly regarded belt for 10 years, when he could have targeted better fights at LHW. So should that be applauded, or should it be criticised? You can count the 21 title defences and say that they trump Andre's, or you can look at the fact that Andre moved up and fought a prime Kovalev, whilst Joe was happy to fight the Veit's and the Salem's at that age. There's an awful lot of factors to analyse here. Statistically, you could say that Ottke has a better resume than Andre. You can quote the undefeated record and the title defences etc. But there's obviously much more to it when you put a guy under the microscope.

 

No worries. I used Bernard, Jones and Eubanks because those are the most noteworthy names on Joe's resume. They add a bit of texture and color to my stance but it's not the foundation.

The Kovalev wins for Ward are pretty much what solidifies him as a shoe in for the Hall. But to say Sergey will finish up as an ATG is putting the cart before the horse. We don't know how Kovalev will look post 2 straight loses or if he has been impacted mentally by how the last one unfolded.

I say the way Joe handled that version of Jones made it a quality win. If Joe barely etched out a decision, or struggled the win would have less significance. We can't take away who or what Jones Jr is just because he wasn't the "Superman" Jones Jr who dominated boxing for the better part of a decade. At the end of the day it's boxing...anything can happen and having skills, experience and craft on your side when physically your in decline...can increase the slim chances of beating the young lion on the come up.

 

I respect what you've written. But beating Roy wasn't a quality win. Not considering that Joe had labelled him as being shot, and that he hadn't had a top level win for 5 years, as well as being bullied and knocked out by Glen Johnson 4 years earlier.

Of course you can take away who Roy was at that stage. That's my point.

You can't just say it was a quality win just because it was Roy Jones. It doesn't work like that.