thoughts and why please? im not convinced,he lost to johnson,adamek had him down,and he outpointed an old tarver. anyone see where this is going????beating 2 old men etc???? the difference is calzaghe himself is an old man dawson isnt but is touted as the second coming,and is put on a pedastle the double standards and hypocrisy on this forum make my day. just for the record i think joe would toy with dawson.
The difference, Trollates, is that Chad Dawson is only 26 years old. His quality of opposition is already being compared to Calzaghe's, who has been a champion since before Chad made his boxing debut. There are no double standards.
:good I'd like to add that I believe his victory over Adamek will be considerd more impressive with time.
Thats the same as saying Calzaghe lost to Reid. Johnson is a few levels above Reid boxing wise. Neither fighter lost.
Dawson is just the next name Joe "has" to beat according to those who will never give Joe his credit, he is nothing special. Joe haters will never admit his greatness, and some pretty decent fighter who went life and death with Johnson, will not change their minds.
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. you have delighted me long enough tonight on more than one thread but to succumb to ones most base level i.e obtuseness and blatant sarcasm leaves one only to conclude this.... Every time I recieve a retort from you I get a fierce desire to be lonesome. one could engage in a frivilouis teta'te but one is feeling mellow this evening and has no need to indulge your little frustrations with a retort,hence no reply will be forthcoming you can flirt till you burst sweetie im just not interested,tata.