WHATS EVERYONE'S PROBLEM??

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:40

For the best part of 3/4 years Calzaghe has been slagged off:

'sick note'
'won't leave Wales'
'scared of fighting real opponents'.

There aint pleasing some people, here is some of the rubbish that has been spoken about some recent wins:

Lacy - novice, overhyped, punching bag (this after the majority of people on here picked Lacy to knock Calzaghe out?.

Then we get...........

Kessler - overrated, robotic, 'was disadvantaged fighting in Wales' (this after the majority of people on here picked Kessler)

Then the icing on the cake................

Hopkins - 43 year old bum, can't punch (after more and more people on here in the last week of the fight picked BHop to win).

Listen people.

Calzaghe is now 45-0 he has 20+ defences. On saturday he fought poorly, yet still beat a man who was top 3 pound for pound, a guy who had beaten some great fighters and a guy who no-one has EVER looked good against.

Joe fought poorly yet still won handily and he should be given credit for going to his opponents back yard, getting knocked down in the 1st yet still winning the fight.

As a fan I was disappointed in the fight - yet am intelligent enough to realise that a win is a win etc etc

Some people need to get a life, What happens next if Joe fights:

Pavlik - 'only a middleweight' 'raw' (although many on here beforehand will predict a Pavlik win)

Tarver - '39 year old' 'boring' (yet still managed to beat a solid fighter in Woods).

Dawson 'too green' 'exposed by Johnson' (yet again on here people were saying he was a big threat to JC'.

See my point - people just don't like Calzaghe beacuse they want to knock winners.

The guy is top 3 pound for pound right now - and the best fighter ever to come out of the UK. get over it.

Rant over

Regards

Wrists

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:47

I think Calzaghe versus Dawson or Johnson would be an excellent fight, but Joe's wrapping things up and looking for big payday and at 36 and after dominating the super-middle division and beating it's young lions (Lacy and Kessler obviously) why shouldn't he? Plus, he's just beat the guy who beat Tarver, who beat Johnson etc etc...

Money talks when you're looking for your pension pay-off. So I hope Joe knocks Jones into the Hall of Fame and then walks into the sunset with his boys, gorgeous girlfriend and lives happily ever after. UNDEFEATED!

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:48

typical brit attitude im afraid

some people just like losers

Tim Henman being the best example

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:49

Its irritating - used to happen to Naz also

Even when he fought a guy with 1 defeat of 50 and KO'd him inside 4 rounds!!!

Very sad - we deserve to be rubbish at sport with some of the attitudes of our fans

Wrists

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:52

Wrists wrote:The guy is top 3 pound for pound right now - and the best fighter ever to come out of the UK. get over it.

Firslty No he isnt the best to come out of the UK, top3 P4P - maybe

I don't dislike Calazage, hes an excellent fighter, I just think he lost. I've picked him to win in all his fights.

The crititicism you made of his opponents do hold some water, hes still an excellent fighter

I think allot of people got pissed off with Calazage when he avoided allot of big fights and did pretty much nothing with his career for 10years and still gave it the 'big I am'

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:54

You miss my point - my criticism of his opponents were an illustration that some people will always find fault when it suits.

Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins - all opponents you can't fault and all dispatched.

Reid, Woodhall, Sheika, Brewer, Mitchell - all very good wins

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:55

Wrists wrote:You miss my point - my criticism of his opponents were an illustration that some people will always find fault when it suits.

Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins - all opponents you can't fault and all dispatched.

Reid, Woodhall, Sheika, Brewer, Mitchell - all very good wins

They are good wins, since 2006 hes been fighting at a higher level, before that from when he beat Eubank onwards he was pissing about and not fighting the best. There were so many piss poor miss matches

It also grates that hes picked opponents (kessler/lacy aside) when they are on the tail end of their careers and past their best

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 21 Apr 2008, 08:58

Fair point

observer1 · Post by **observer1** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:02

Naz Was Slagged off 100X more than Calzaghe, and IMO, Naz did more and and better than JOE.

The only reason they slag Joe off is because everyone knows he has the talent, but he just delayed his big fights way way too late. Joe will be one of those "What Could have been" fighters.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:08

oh for a middle ground

chief · Post by **chief** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:30

People's issues with Calzaghe tend to stem from the level of his opposition between c.2001 and c.2007 which was thought to be somewhat unacceptable... A stream of relative WBO nobodies or fighters who had already lost to some of the other established names in the division...

Possibly the Veit rematch was the final straw in many peoples eyes... Add in the fact that throughout a lot of this period there was widespread dissatisfaction on boxing chat room boards about SN matchmaking in general (Hatton, Harrison etc) and JC really did take a pasting from many regular forum posters who felt that he was milking his fan base for all it was worth...

The last 2 bouts (Kessler and Hopkins) make it easier now to try and forgive but many people wont forget.

sharpei_louis · Post by **sharpei_louis** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:40

Everybody keeps saying that Calzaghe isn't best ever British fighter, but none ever suggest someone who is...!!!

British p-4-p Top 3:

#1 - vacant
#2 - vacant
#3 - can't be Calzaghe, there must have been someone ages ago who was better..??? What about Bruno, he was a heavyweight world champion!! (wasn't he?)

As a nation we just knock success, loving near failures who had a nice attitude. I'm not saying Calzaghe is GOAT, but I've not got an expansive enough knowledge to suggest many better than 45-0 and fought plenty of credible fights (as well as a lot of duds, granted). Please can Calzaghe's detractors put forward some names and reasons?

Wales · Post by **Wales** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:45

When discussing all time p4p lists we have to take into consideration each era.

I'd put Jimmy Wilde ahead of Joe, the little atom is in my eyes the best fighter Wales has ever produced.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:46

Jimmy Wilde has to be a shout (I know hes an old-schooler, but still), along with some of the other great flyweights we have had, like Rinty Monaghan

Lennox Lewis
Nigel Benn
Ted 'Kid' Lewis
Jack 'Kid' Berg
Naseem Hamed

All those names deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Calzaghe, and I dont think it would be unfair to put any of them in a 'Best Of British' list

sharpei_louis · Post by **sharpei_louis** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:47

I always feel that we look back on fighters of other generations very nostalgicaly though, noone remembers their flaws at all.
If Calzaghe is #2 p4p British fighter of all time, we are pretty lucky to be in the era to watch that and appreciate it, but we don't, we all criticise constantly.

Obviously Hamed was amazingly exciting, but to comeback so poorly from defeat means he can't go higher than Calzaghe on my list, similarly Benn who was an exciting fighter but never achieved as much.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:49

Jimmy Wilde
Lennox Lewis

There are two ways to view Joe's career.

Would we think less of him if he'd won and lost to a prime Jones or Hopkins etc, as opposed to his unblemished record?

And lest we forget, several very, very mediocre fighters were accommodated and more notable and engaging opponents overlooked.

Mundine, Ottke, Robin Reid II, Echols, Froch, Beyer, Catley, Green not to mention Hopkins, Johnson, Jones Jnr, Tarver, Taylor...who have all operated within spitting distance of Joe's weight class for years never came close to fighting Calzaghe despite their simultaneous careers.

On the other hand, he's unbeaten, unified and a two weight champion and rarely loses a more than 2-3 rounds in a fight.

Alternatively, he lacks pop and has done for years, throws slappy punches and has been casual in defences against mediocre opponents.

Or you could say, he's adapted to fragile hands, always makes the fight and is usually entertaining to watch regardless of the opponents style.

I think Calzaghe's career has been very good and he has been a tremendous fighter and he's achieved so much. And yet. I personally feel there will always be a sense of what if to his career.

What if he'd fought top line opponents 5 years ago.

What if he'd got victories over Markus Beyer or Roy Jones on his record 5 years ago when they would have meant something.

Imagine.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 21 Apr 2008, 09:52

I think a lot of people rate Calzaghe highly on ability and overlook the fact that there are many fighters he could have fought to improve his CV. He has been champion for a long time, and for every fighter he has defended against, there is another fighter who would have looked better on the CV.

thats not to say that it was a simple matter to make those fights, but there is as you say a big 'what if' to his career, as well as a big sense of 'well done Joe'

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 21 Apr 2008, 12:31

the problem is, elite fighters dont waste almost their whole career fighting fringe level operators. they just don't.

Calzaghe may have been capable of mixing with the elite if he genuinely looked to make the huge fights and build a rep in america sooner, like when he beat Eubank. That win gave him the belief, it was then time to get out there, get on american unercards and press for big fights.

He made money with warren, but im sure noone believes those bullshit excuses about being 'scared of flying' when he was in his pomp.

It's been discussed to death but if he had had a david haye-like attitude he could have done more with his career.

Eraserhead · Post by **Eraserhead** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:28

Riddick Blowe wrote:the problem is, elite fighters dont waste almost their whole career fighting fringe level operators. they just don't.

Calzaghe may have been capable of mixing with the elite if he genuinely looked to make the huge fights and build a rep in america sooner, like when he beat Eubank. That win gave him the belief, it was then time to get out there, get on american unercards and press for big fights.

He made money with warren, but im sure noone believes those bullshit excuses about being 'scared of flying' when he was in his pomp.

It's been discussed to death but if he had had a david haye-like attitude he could have done more with his career.

That's the crux of the whole thing. Joe Calzaghe has had the ability to mix with the elite but has only now achieved that kind of status at 36 years of age. You can talk all day about his 20-something title defences and how he was number one at 168 for so long, but it was a famously weak division. You can count the number of genuine world-class fighters Joe fought during that reign on one hand. He beat fringe contender after fringe contender and plateaued out. He stood still for years. It's only post-Lacy that he's really made his mark. That's why all this talk of him being the greatest ever British fighter is a bit laughable.

Look at the other truly great world champions of the modern era. They capitalise on their prime years by fighting at the top, taking risks and proving themselves. Their prime nights occur during their mid-20s. Joe Calzaghe was never prepared to do that. He was never prepared to stand up and test himself against the best. He had his comfort zone and stuck to it. In the end, Joe only decided to test himself because it was getting too late and he realised it.

A genuine shame, because he stood Lacy on his head and bettered Kessler in impressive fashion. I'm not even sure Joe C was in his prime when he did either. I don't think Joe is a Floyd Mayweather or Roy Jones type of talent, but he could have achieved even more than he has done. Great fighter, but could've been greater.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:33

That's why I kind of wish Joe would have another fight of significance. Not just the biggest name that they can bring over the the Millennium Stadium (which is apparently booked up on the Nov date anyway) for the right price.

Why not fish for more USD? Now that he's fought in America he should be looking at a PPV fight with Pavlik. He'd get credit for beating the younger guy, it won't be any harder than beating Kessler.

I'm also very eager to see Joe vs Johnson.

Glen Johnson is always willing to travel. He also iced Jones, beat Tarver (but lost the rematch clearly), Woods (possibly, at least twice), and can say he beat Dawson (a decision that everyone seems split on in the media). ok ok, doesn't bring massive money but a solid title defence. And most importantly of all, a compelling fight. Maybe the hardest out there (a reason for it not to happen, them I guess!)

Joe's career is a little bit too PLANNED. Many ppl including myself had it to Joe by 1 point. This, vs a 43 yo Hopkins. Would Joe still be 1 PT the better if he was fighting a 36 yo Hopkins?

The funny thing is, Calzaghe wouldn't have had 1/2 the trouble he had on Sat if he'd fought more American challengers. Joe beat bruisers like Brewer, Sheika and Mitchell but if he'd beaten a slicker type, with an alert defence and a sneaky right & ability to smother up close, he would have beaten Hopkins out of sight.

Eraserhead · Post by **Eraserhead** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:42

Autobarn wrote:
The funny thing is, Calzaghe wouldn't have had 1/2 the trouble he had on Sat if he'd fought more American challengers. Joe beat bruisers like Brewer, Sheika and Mitchell but if he'd beaten a slicker type, with an alert defence and a sneaky right & ability to smother up close, he would have beaten Hopkins out of sight.

Interesting point. I'd never compare anyone to Hopkins in terms of style, but you're probably onto something. Calzaghe, for all his physical gifts, clearly had no idea to how to break down or even gain succes against the slick style of Hopkins. You could see it on his face. he was confused - didn't know whether to lead or wait, jab or feint, etc. etc. Hopkins negated everything he did with just the threat of the right hand counter. A few more of those tough Philly fighters - even guys with losing records - early on in Joe's career probably would have been beneficial.

Better still, why not actually get Joe some PROPER SPARRING before such a fight? Christ, if there's one guy that requires some quality technical sparring it's Bernard freaking Hopkins. Enzo C should've forked out and got in someone who had Hopkins' style down and knew how to mess Joe about.

Calzaghe's made a career of winning and I don't think Enzo C is the type of guy to change a winning recipe. It's as though while Joe's always winning, there's no need to contemplate weaknesses or what the other guy brings to the table. That got shown up a little on Saturday as I felt a few chinks showed up in Joe.

Iknowmystuff · Post by **Iknowmystuff** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:51

Eraserhead wrote:
Riddick Blowe wrote:the problem is, elite fighters dont waste almost their whole career fighting fringe level operators. they just don't.

Calzaghe may have been capable of mixing with the elite if he genuinely looked to make the huge fights and build a rep in america sooner, like when he beat Eubank. That win gave him the belief, it was then time to get out there, get on american unercards and press for big fights.

He made money with warren, but im sure noone believes those bullshit excuses about being 'scared of flying' when he was in his pomp.

It's been discussed to death but if he had had a david haye-like attitude he could have done more with his career.
That's the crux of the whole thing. Joe Calzaghe has had the ability to mix with the elite but has only now achieved that kind of status at 36 years of age. You can talk all day about his 20-something title defences and how he was number one at 168 for so long, but it was a famously weak division. You can count the number of genuine world-class fighters Joe fought during that reign on one hand. He beat fringe contender after fringe contender and plateaued out. He stood still for years. It's only post-Lacy that he's really made his mark. That's why all this talk of him being the greatest ever British fighter is a bit laughable.

Look at the other truly great world champions of the modern era. They capitalise on their prime years by fighting at the top, taking risks and proving themselves. Their prime nights occur during their mid-20s. Joe Calzaghe was never prepared to do that. He was never prepared to stand up and test himself against the best. He had his comfort zone and stuck to it. In the end, Joe only decided to test himself because it was getting too late and he realised it.

A genuine shame, because he stood Lacy on his head and bettered Kessler in impressive fashion. I'm not even sure Joe C was in his prime when he did either. I don't think Joe is a Floyd Mayweather or Roy Jones type of talent, but he could have achieved even more than he has done. Great fighter, but could've been greater.

this is by far the best post and most accurate assesment on Calzaghe, too bad his loyal non objective fans refuse to believe any of this logical reasoning.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:51

up until 1984 the super middle weight division didnt exist... up until 1983 the IBF didnt exist, up until 1988 the WBO didnt exist.

So put Joe in a time machine and send him back to the "nostalgic" era's and he would have had a career at light heavy and no matter which period you send him he wouldn't have anywhere near 20 world title defences. He would be win a world title i am sure and may for a short period of time be considered the best in the division.

Thats why you have to look at the older guys more favourably. better depth, less world titles, less weight divisions.

sounds harsh on Calzaghe but "greatest brit P4P" isn't an easy title to win.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 21 Apr 2008, 13:52

I admire the way Joe found a way around the right hand. But if was bleeding hard work. He had to walk in, gloves down, to entice Hopkins' right, which he then slipped and sometimes beat Hopkins to the punch with a good sttraight left. That was a bit of a dangerous tightrope.

If Joe was Clinton Woods, he would never have got into the fight. But he really had to work Hopkins out the hard way. The hardest way imaginable. Props to Joe for finding a way - most of the US media have it to Joe by a point or two, though the Brits have been harder on him - but he could be a better fighter if his team wasn't - IMO - so narrow minded!

Great idea re the sparring.

Calzaghe's made a career of winning and I don't think Enzo C is the type of guy to change a winning recipe. It's as though while Joe's always winning, there's no need to contemplate weaknesses or what the other guy brings to the table. That got shown up a little on Saturday as I felt a few chinks showed up in Joe.

I think having Warren as promoter helped this. His legendary good timing, making fights at the right time, always getting his fighter the edge.

jim wright · Post by **jim wright** » 21 Apr 2008, 14:17

Beat me to the point there autobarn,

calzaghe is clearly a great fighter but he is also probably the best british managed fighter of all time, especially if he does a job on the over the hill RJJ come the Autumn.

Took the title off of a faded Eubank, handpicked many defences, took the big two risks (lacy and kessler) towards the end of his era and finishes up with a Hopkins and RJJ on the slide.

masterful handling by Mr Warren but still a great fighter nonetheless.

WHATS EVERYONE'S PROBLEM??

WHATS EVERYONE'S PROBLEM??

Re: WHATS VERYONE'S PROBLEM??