Who do you rank higher: Andre Ward or Joe Calzaghe

The red "Krusher" logo was where most of the his shots landed. And there's no way that they could have been classed as being low.

 

No doubt man. The guy is a sleaze bag both in and out of the ring. Glad people like this make videos like that to expose what a POS Ward is.

 

it's not fair to rate a cheat and dirty player against warriors. ward is in a different level below them. it's time to differentiate these type of players to those warriors who love and respect the sport that they are willing to die in the name of fairness and ability.

 

The belt line was officially deemed low in the pre fight instruction...meaning anything on the belt line would be considered low. So all of the shots that hit the Krusher logo and below were illegal shots. That video circulating around this thread show the low blows clearly...However, what's not called by the ref is "legal". The boxers can complain, the corner and promoters can complain, but the boxers have to deal with those kinds of things on their own while a match is going on. I think Kovalev broke down because he the shots were affecting him and Weeks pretty much just let the fight continue. Kovalev was looking for help which he can't do. It's only him and Ward in there.

 

Still to this day think calzaghe got lucky with his career. They hand picked it perfectly. Frank warren the wily old fox that he is...got guys across with good records but werent nearly as good as their records suggested most of them went on to lose a lot of fights anytime they stepped up. One time joes reluctance to fight the best paid off for him.

Dont get me wrong joe was a great fighter...but he got eubanks. Hopkins. Roy jones. And jeff lacy at just the right time. Some of his biggest wins. Lacy was riding at his highest point but was still pretty untested. The other 3 we,re older always a nitemare against joes unbelievable workrate. Even kessler i always felt was overrated in the grand scheme of things.

Everyones got at least one controversial opinion in boxing...bearing in mind this is the american section so very few will agree...but imo hatton was a better fighter than joe. Another guy that got the benefit of hand picked opponents. But he just challenged himself against the best of the division its just so happens that the best of his division turned out to be all time greats.

I remember a time no one wanted to watch joe...think it was till lacy. Britain was massive on hatton. They rated him the better fighter for years...then it turned overnight. Joe just picked the better fights and ricky took the more challenging ones. If anyone gets the chance to watch hattons career from the early days...you ll see he was a lot better than he became in the end. Its just that the guys he was fighting we,re no mugs and he was never a 147 fighter. Reach too short for it.

I d say wards the better of the two. Calzaghe was great but he got lucky.

 

"Multiple votes are allowed."

WHY!?!?! This is a h2h poll!!

 

Don't encourage these rank amateurs!

 

You're mistaken.

Go and watch the pre-fight instructions again.

Tony Weeks put his hand next to the white band of Sergey's shorts, and he said: "Everything here * is okay"

* (as in the area he was pointing towards)

 

You've made some great points.

For me, Joe was definitely the better fighter. But he didn't have Ricky's will. But that's because he was so fixated on keeping his zero intact.

I will always maintain that Ricky's skills never matched his ambition, whereas Joe's ambition never matched his skills.

 

Check out this video on YouTube:

This content is protected

 

Yeah hard to disagree with that about the skill and ambition mate. Its probably the only real controversial boxing view i ve got that pretty much no one else agrees with me on. Neither we,re the best pure boxers in the world. Joes fast hands and unlimited stamina were very hard to beat and ricky with his will and aggresion was a hard man to keep off.

Rickys style was just harder to appreciate..cause he was more seek and destroy and didnt really care how he acheived it. When the elite guys exposed him. Then people turned it into he was unskilled. But still say that if joe would have went in against the elite he would have been exposed much the same. Just lucky the division didnt really have elite level talents when he was fighting.

Think i ll need to just decide i m wrong on this one mate...cause still to find someone that will agree with me about it. Lol.

 

I've seen it.

There's lots of better videos around, showing you different angles, so you can see exactly where the shots landed.

Again, most of the shots were on the red "Krusher" logo.

Have you gone back and seen Weeks' pre-fight instructions?

 

Good points.

I agree with you. I think Ricky's skills were a little under appreciated.

I wish they were both still fighting.

 

You're right....it looks like Weeks touched right on the belt line and indicated that any punches there were good. I couldn't hear because it was a Russian telecast and they were talking over his instructions but it seemed like weeks was saying the shots on the belt line were good. Typically anything below the top of the belt line is low....but sometimes boxers jack up their cups above their belly button and refs compensate for that. Kovalev's cup wasn't covering his belly button so I didn't think Weeks would have called the actual belt to be low for Kovalev. But it's the refs discretion

 

He should have went low as well. When it's only you and your opponent in the ring and the ref is letting fouls go.....retaliate. It's better than waiting and hoping the ref will change his stripes or waiting for the ref to help...especially in a world championship fight