Why wasn't Calzaghe given more credit for his wins against RJJ and Hopkins?

People spend so much time emphasizing how having zero losses is some terrible thing, right?

 

Slapped them like the bitches they were, levels!!

 

that bit was actually really bad, it was the turning point at which I decided not to like this guy anymore.

one might argue the case that roy did the same to mcallum, but mcallum was still a champ back then. it wasnt the same at all. joe was just being a playground bully, albeit an adept one.

 

yeh i got that already.
but, what I was saying was they couldnt be both calzaghe haters AND "they didnt know calzaghe". its not possible to hate an individual whilst not knowing who you are hating. You'd need to know them in order to proceed to the following stage of hating on them.


I am not sure anyone had any love for lacy, he did nothing apart from being a recognised champ. I think the reason they backed him was that he had a recognised title. Its like you'd back the WBA champ over the WBU or WBF champ anyday if you didnt know them, because everybody knows the WBU or WBF is a joke.
I am certain the americans were simply impressed with joe finally rising to world level in that fight, commended him for making the jump. why wouldnt they?

the hate came later when he clowned shot jones during jones eurobum "exhibition tour" like a man mocking a parkinsons victim in a hospital. That deserves hate, compounded by him lying to boxing fans that it was a worthwhile fight after explicitly saying it was worthless years earlier - blatant dishonesty is a disliked trait.

 

Honestly? I wish people didn't fetishise it so much. It's led to boxers being shepherded away from genuine risks, it stops dangerous up and comers from getting their shot at the champ etc.

I think boxing would improve if every young fighter tasted defeat at least once coming up so we could get beyond the stuffed 0 unbeaten records and have more genuine fights where either boxer may lose.

 

Completely agree with this, so many people are fixated on 0's which robs us of amazing fights.

 

they were older..

 

I am not a fan of Calzaghe but even I had him a huge favourite over Lacy was expecting him to KO Lacy in 7 rounds, Lacy was horribly overrated and Calzaghe was horribly underrated.

The fact that Ottke was ranked above Calzaghe during their era just goes to show how clueless people were on Calzaghe at the time. I get why people rated Ottke higher as he fought more American opposition, had the more respected title and unified sooner against Mitchell, but you only had to watch them fight to see Calzaghe was a level or two above Ottke as a fighter. Had they fought Calzaghe would of put a Lacy type beating on Ottke.

 

Thanks for that, didn't know that, always nice to pick up some new info.

Offer might seem low, could be a low ball offer, but maybe not, Calzaghe wasn't exactly selling out big arena's at the time and wasn't making big purses.

 

Calzaghe was a great fighter. But he was overrated based on his record. Tbf he was a nitemare style for most but his best attributes we,re his stamina and punch input. Basically a nitemare for older guys to fight against. And that' s why 3 of his top five wins came against older guys that could,nt keep up with his output. They knew what they we,re doing with his matchmaking. Eubank, Hopkins, Roy Jones 3 great names. But all of them at the point of fighting Joe couldn't,t keep up with his output/stamina which didn't,t really leave Joe all the way through. As soon as they started to slow down he got out of the game...because outside of they attributes he was pretty flawed.

I always had him down to get exposed against a great fighter. His old man who trained him didn't,t really know all that much about boxing. Just got them attributes so high it gave guys a lot of trouble.

But Roy Jones in his prime or even Bernard would have exposed him. Hence the reason he stuck fighting lesser guys. Not trying to take anything away cause Joe was great. But outside of older guys all you really had was lacy, robin Reid and Kessler. Lacy was way overrated. Reid was solid as was Kessler. But neither we,re great fighters. The rest of the division was poor for years. Not joes fault but he did have a fortunate career...between picking guys at the right time avoiding guys and having a pretty mediocre division for years.

Still a great fighter tho. Just not elite.

 

Why are you hypothesising about a 30 & 40 year old when you know his actual age at the time? Are you stupid or something?!

 

Isn't that another lie? He was 43 in one post & 40 in your next LOL The fact that you're all over the place & prepared to make false statements on this again undermines your credibility & shows just how rattled this retiree has you!

A gap of 13 years! A gap or 10! What's it gunna be next week? 15?

 

Roy Jones was always an over hyped ducker who heavily relied on roids and ducking to get where he was. He was the Floyd archetype. Not only was roid a fraud, he was a shot fraud by the time he faced Zaggy, and he still managed to drop him, so Zaggy doesn't get much credit for that. The Hopkins win was good however.

 

you've not read the post. everyone else has and realised the point I was making.
Let me know why ONLY YOU hasnt realised it yet.

cheers.

In the meantime I am looking forward to your reply to this post of mine in this thread -

something along the lines of "HAHAHA HEROL! Are you saying Calzaghe has a gun and fired thru the ceiling? Another Herol lie!"