Who does the Classic rank higher: RICARDO LOPEZ or JOE CALZAGHE?

That's basically the way I view it.

 

It was close until the latter part of Joes career where he pulled above Lopez, and its purely due to a competition factor.
Calzahge could only be penalized more for not taking or forcing the fights that could have been made earlier in his career, whereas Lopez had far less options.
Neither fufilled their potential.

 

A truly arguable one.Both have a lot of the same plus\negative points despite being wildly different fighters

Calzaghe fought better fighters overall and was perhpas more versatile.

Lopez had less off-nights and showed less holes in his armour.

I think Lopez should really have fought at light flyweight at the least to be honest.He certainly had the frame to move up well.

 

All of this plus the aforementioned sentiments.

Calzaghe has Hopkins, but damn close. Kessler, though that's a very good win rather than an outstanding one.

But even accounting for Calzaghes jazzy style and obvious effectiveness and adaptibility, Lopez is one of the most aesthetically pleasing fighters to watch, period.

They're both around the 95-110 range in my mind. I give them allowances for their lack of depth, but pluses for their effectiveness, ability and consistency in performance.

As aforementioned, it's down to what you like. Calzaghes few close fights but slightly better opposition, or Lopezs seeming infallability but lack of top level wins.

 

Mantequilla, I agree wholeheartedly on your point about Lopez's weight. He was like, 5'5. With his skillset he couldve went upto Fly and carried it well IMO, Carbajal and Chiquita are obviously fights he shouldve taken. Odd that he didn't as althoughthey would've been competitive it would be ludicrous to not make him the favourite against either, though cases can be made for either fighter upsetting him.

A massive missed oppurtunity IMO. Beating those two, themselves not genuine beasts in terms of skillset, would've at least added some substance to Lopez's obvious strengths in resume (longevity, dominance, undefeated, rarely lost a round) and probably justified a 60-75 placing.

I'm not certain Calzage couldve done much more of how much a win over someone like Glen Johnson, Sven Ottke or Clinton Woods would've added to his standing, or how a clear loss to a fresher Jones or Hop would've detracted from the opinions that objective minds have on him, but he was a fighter who did alright for himself, considering he waited until he was in his mid-to-late 30's before capitalising on his win over an ageing Eubank.

It's an obvious name to bring up but Tocker Pudwill? Come on

 

What about moving up to LH in the late 90's?

 

A couple of years ago I would have had Lopez by a decent margin...but now I think it is a lot closer.

Ive slightly moved up Joe in my rankings...I think his standing still has time to grow because I reckon with some of the guys he beat still rolling around what they end up doing with the rest of their career will have have some impact on Joe's resume.

Ricardo is one of the best technicians Ive seen on film....but a more through analysis of his record has seen me move him down a bit.

Id still have Lopez a bit above Joe at this stage...probably 10-15 spots.

 

My biggest fault with Lopez is he never really stepped it up and took on any real tests. To me his two biggest wins were against Sorjaturong, who had chin problems, and Alvarez, who could be outboxed. He was around in the Carbajal/Gonzalez era, and while those two were making big bucks taking each other on, Lopez was taking the safe fights at 105, apparently unwiling to step up 3 pounds. I could be wrong, but that's how it looks to me. Lopez never stepped up in weight until the end of his career, and by that time, no one was really around for him. Even Marc Johnson at 112 would have been a nice fight, but that didn't happen either.

 

Woods wouldn't have meant much, but a unification fight with Ottke was the biggest fight for him at 168 for some time. That's exactly the kind of fight I would've liked to have seen him have more of during his prime years.

 

Um, isn't that what I basically discuss?

What I mean is, I feel his career moved in the right direction I.e he took the right fights at the right time.

I don't belies he's the infallible super boxer some make him out to be put it that way

My2Sense: yeah Ottke was pretty essential, for once though I think Calzaghe couldn't have been the problem there, negotiations wise.

 

I think Ricardo Lopez was the more skilled and smarter fighter. Joe is very good in his own right but just not as good.

 

Lopez by far . Calzaghe was very good but not in Lopez league.
Lopez top 30 ATG
Calzaghe top 100 atg

 

Well, this will create some debate. I can't be arsed anymore

 

Both are in my "not great enough to care to distinguish" category.