Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

EddieShredder
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by EddieShredder »

From the independent today;

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 09615.html
James Lawton: Past greats unfairly knocked over in rush to hype Calzaghe's achievement
McGuigan's picture is at odds with reality. Why? The need to sell every morsel of our sport. If the major victim is truth, who cares?
Tuesday, 11 November 2008

You might say it is impertinent to question the boxing judgement of Barry McGuigan, the Clones Cyclone who flies straight into any serious assessment of British fighting's best post-war performers.

He fought with great courage and wit and when he lost his hard-won world title in the suffocating outdoor heat of Las Vegas, against a Mexican-Texan who was reared in such conditions, they had to take him to hospital with a life-threatening level of dehydration. He even managed not to wilt in the blast of Marco Pierre White's kitchen, and ego, in one of the more engaging reality shows.

Yet, from the perspective of ringside at Madison Square Garden in the early hours of Sunday morning, it was still dismaying to hear that McGuigan, back in the TV studio, had given Joe Calzaghe's defeat of Roy Jones Jnr a quite extraordinary rating.

Of course, it is true that in general there are few more generous souls than those of ex-fighters.

It is one reason why so many of them finish up broke, McGuigan, happily, proving one exception. Yet surely there is a difference between an eagerness to give credit where it is due, and in the process disabusing anyone of the idea that old pride and the angst that can come with the ageing process has turned you into a curmudgeonly critic of all that is new, and flying so far over the top you might be in need of an oxygen mask.

For some at least McGuigan surely flirted with that latter risk when claiming that Calzaghe had not only produced a fabulous, "sublime, absolutely sublime" performance, but established as fact that he simply gets better and better by such margins that it is amazing he should think of quitting at the age of 36.

When McGuigan says things like that you wonder whether the TV studio was located on some distant planet.

Yes, of course Joe Calzaghe showed us again a fine range of formidable gifts but at what point does McGuigan, and a growing army of cheerleaders, feed in the sad but unavoidable fact that here he was fighting the last remnants of a once sensational talent, one that had become the most poignant parody of what it had been?

Who benefits from the avoidance of such an uncomfortable fact, except perhaps Calgazhe if, after the weeks of reflection he has sensibly enough granted himself, decides that in fact the weekend fight was not his last hurrah but the prelude to a hugely profitable farewell at home in his adoring Cardiff bailiwick of the Millennium Stadium?

Certainly, not among the beneficiaries is any sober ranking of great performance – and proper respect for all that has preceded the achievements of boxing in Calzaghe's native valleys and the rest of Britain.

By giving so generously to Joe, surely it is at cost to the memory of such fighters as Kenny Buchanan, Lennox Lewis, Randy Turpin, John Conteh, John H Stracey, Jim Watt, Alan Minter, not to mention Sir Henry Cooper, who on one unforgettable occasion visited a left hook on Muhammad Ali which, according to the great man, shook up his kinfolk all the way back in Africa.

Closer to Calzaghe's home, there are other disservices implicit in McGuigan's extravagant praise. Howard Winstone, who lost the end of the fingers of his right hand, was a brilliant featherweight who fought superbly against the formidably strong Vicente Saldivar, a fight that Hugh McIlvanney said so memorably had really been settled in the womb.

The Welsh heavyweight Tommy Farr's campaigning in America led him to a performance so fine and durable against the great Joe Louis that it provoked the building of beacon fires of celebration.

McGuigan's blanket assessment of Calzaghe's performance as the greatest in British fight history also laid waste the rankings of other great men of the earlier days, when they fought to live without the biannual underpinning of pay-per-view millions. Men like Jimmy Wilde, Jim Driscoll, Ted Kid Lewis and Jack Kid Berg.

Calzaghe's fellow Welshmen, Wilde, the Mighty Atom, and Peerless Jim Driscoll, for example, warranted at least a fleeting thought here on Sunday when Calzaghe, congratulated himself on concluding his career with a flourish in America that consisted, like it or not, of two victories over opponents with a combined age of 82 years, one of whom, Jones, revealing himself to be utterly shot from the third round onwards.

Driscoll also campaigned in America, where the locals were soon won over by the sweetness of his style, one in sharp contrast to the prevailing fashion there for much more overt aggression. Peerless Jim fought 571 rounds as a professional and lost four times in 77 fights. It is different strokes for different times, of course, but if part of the reason for Calzaghe's elevation is longevity and an unbeaten record in 46 fights, only two of which happened in America, what chance would anyone give him of going another 31 fights, against the toughest possible opposition, without any blemish? It would be an impractical demand on even the formidable gifts of Calzaghe. If you say the past is the past, and no longer has any relevance to the present, what then can we anticipate in the future, if not still more blurring of the verities of time?

No one can really blame Calzaghe for riding his success, nor the complaints he made about his previous exclusions before winning the BBC Sports Personality of the Year award. He was right to speak up for his hard trade and his own contribution to it, and perhaps he did that in the nick of time when we note the boiling controversies involving the current claims of such as Olympic stars Rebecca Adlington and Chris Hoy and the apparently inevitable triumph of Lewis Hamilton.

The worry is that we are now far gone in a sports culture where the headlines of today tend to obliterate the meaning of some of the greatest achievements in the history of sport, and so many of the standards they created.

None of this was any concern of Calzaghe when he emerged on a brilliant Manhattan Sunday sporting the wounds acquired when Roy Jones Jnr produced his one moment of authentic menace, a first-round knockdown which had disturbing implications for the Welshman no longer, it seemed, than it took him to clear his head, a feat comfortably accomplished by the end of the round.

He spoke of the pleasure of a man fulfilled – and also dismissed talk of a possible last fight against his most potentially challenging opponent, the 26-year-old unbeaten world light heavyweight champion Chad Dawson.

"They're talking about Dawson but that doesn't get me so excited," said Calzaghe. "He's won a couple of fights and beaten [Antonio] Tarver, a shot fighter."

Here, though, Calzaghe cast something of a shadow over the meaning of his American adventures.

Tarver will celebrate his 40th birthday in a few days' time, it is true, but then that makes him a mere two months older than Jones. It gets worse from the point of view of Joe's deification. Three years ago Tarver outpointed Jones. Six months later he blasted him away in two rounds. A few weeks ago Dawson knocked down Tarver before making him look like an irredeemably old man in a unanimous points decision.

Mere details, of course, but when you put a few of them together they make a rather different mosaic to the one produced by Barry McGuigan in the television studio. McGuigan's picture is at odds with reality, and why is it so? Why have recent judgements been so inflated? It is no mystery, of course. It comes with the requirement to sell almost every morsel of our sport and if the major victim is truth, who, these days, really cares?

The point is that if someone like Barry McGuigan, with all his achievements and available perspective, is not fastidious about the truths of his most demanding sport, from whom can we expect proper care?

Praising Joe Calzaghe, acknowledging his talent and those occasions when it was required to be fully exercised, is no hardship for anyone. But at various stages we encounter the problem of an excessive price to pay. One of them is wiping away the achievements of a man like Jim Driscoll. That, no doubt, was not Barry McGuigan's intention, but who can say it was not the effect?

You cannot say that Joe Calzaghe is the best without diminishing so many who went before him. Surely, it cannot be done.
Rocky Balboa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1851
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 16:38

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Rocky Balboa »

Dawson is a young, hungry fighter, so he is the man to fight. In facing Dawson, he would be facing a guy who's at the top of his game. Dawson might have even peaked yet.

However, there's always a new contender coming through, so maybe Joe will call it a day. I get the feeling training & getting into the required condition for a bout has become a bit of a burden to Joe of late!
Exoddus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1516
Joined: 08 Oct 2007, 10:30

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Exoddus »

"They're talking about Dawson but that doesn't get me so excited," said Calzaghe. "He's won a couple of fights and beaten [Antonio] Tarver, a shot fighter."

Here, though, Calzaghe cast something of a shadow over the meaning of his American adventures.

Tarver will celebrate his 40th birthday in a few days' time, it is true, but then that makes him a mere two months older than Jones. It gets worse from the point of view of Joe's deification. Three years ago Tarver outpointed Jones. Six months later he blasted him away in two rounds. A few weeks ago Dawson knocked down Tarver before making him look like an irredeemably old man in a unanimous points decision.
That's really idiotic. Did he intend to make himself look like an ass? Calzaghe also mentioned Roy Jones Jr in his book saying he's a shot fighter and there’s nothing to gain by fighting him. Calzaghe is a hypocrite.

His next fight will probably be against Traver :lol:.
Max Molyneux
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7084
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Max Molyneux »

Calzaghe should just retire, Dawson doesn't like workrate and Joe Is faster and can box too.

Dawson struggled with Glen Johnson's workrate and was hurt by a non puncher, he has a shaky jaw. Dawson will just get seen as a hype job afterwards.

Calzaghe talked down Kessler too and fought him so he might fight Dawson If he stays on.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Autobarn »

There has always been a reason for not fighting this and that fighter. Remember all those dismissive comments about x or y top contender / title holder, Joe then going on to fight someone who shouldn't even be approved for a world title fight. And I think we've seen all the lists of the fights that could or would have happened.

Now, Joe is simply too big for anyone because he's won in Vegas and Noo York.

It's always the same. There is always a reason for not taking the best fights out there (barring Lacy & Kessler which were important fights and great achivements). This has been got at elsewhere - Joe is a brilliant competitor in the ring, but isn't so bold in his choice of competition.

Calzaghe's now THE light heavy champ, but how are the contenders supposed to get a crack at him? Dopn't champions fight contenders?

If the Jones fight was going to lead to something, making Joe's name bigger so he can jump into some kind of meaningful fight, then this would be fine. But it doesn't look like a means to an end, as an end in itself, a self indulgent ego trip, a forgettable moment in boxing history.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by whiskey »

Good post Eddie and quite poignant.




:TU:
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by gobbles »

EddieShredder wrote:From the independent today;

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 09615.html
James Lawton: Past greats unfairly knocked over in rush to hype Calzaghe's achievement
McGuigan's picture is at odds with reality. Why? The need to sell every morsel of our sport. If the major victim is truth, who cares?
Tuesday, 11 November 2008

You might say it is impertinent to question the boxing judgement of Barry McGuigan, the Clones Cyclone who flies straight into any serious assessment of British fighting's best post-war performers.

He fought with great courage and wit and when he lost his hard-won world title in the suffocating outdoor heat of Las Vegas, against a Mexican-Texan who was reared in such conditions, they had to take him to hospital with a life-threatening level of dehydration. He even managed not to wilt in the blast of Marco Pierre White's kitchen, and ego, in one of the more engaging reality shows.

Yet, from the perspective of ringside at Madison Square Garden in the early hours of Sunday morning, it was still dismaying to hear that McGuigan, back in the TV studio, had given Joe Calzaghe's defeat of Roy Jones Jnr a quite extraordinary rating.

Of course, it is true that in general there are few more generous souls than those of ex-fighters.

It is one reason why so many of them finish up broke, McGuigan, happily, proving one exception. Yet surely there is a difference between an eagerness to give credit where it is due, and in the process disabusing anyone of the idea that old pride and the angst that can come with the ageing process has turned you into a curmudgeonly critic of all that is new, and flying so far over the top you might be in need of an oxygen mask.

For some at least McGuigan surely flirted with that latter risk when claiming that Calzaghe had not only produced a fabulous, "sublime, absolutely sublime" performance, but established as fact that he simply gets better and better by such margins that it is amazing he should think of quitting at the age of 36.

When McGuigan says things like that you wonder whether the TV studio was located on some distant planet.

Yes, of course Joe Calzaghe showed us again a fine range of formidable gifts but at what point does McGuigan, and a growing army of cheerleaders, feed in the sad but unavoidable fact that here he was fighting the last remnants of a once sensational talent, one that had become the most poignant parody of what it had been?

Who benefits from the avoidance of such an uncomfortable fact, except perhaps Calgazhe if, after the weeks of reflection he has sensibly enough granted himself, decides that in fact the weekend fight was not his last hurrah but the prelude to a hugely profitable farewell at home in his adoring Cardiff bailiwick of the Millennium Stadium?

Certainly, not among the beneficiaries is any sober ranking of great performance – and proper respect for all that has preceded the achievements of boxing in Calzaghe's native valleys and the rest of Britain.

By giving so generously to Joe, surely it is at cost to the memory of such fighters as Kenny Buchanan, Lennox Lewis, Randy Turpin, John Conteh, John H Stracey, Jim Watt, Alan Minter, not to mention Sir Henry Cooper, who on one unforgettable occasion visited a left hook on Muhammad Ali which, according to the great man, shook up his kinfolk all the way back in Africa.

Closer to Calzaghe's home, there are other disservices implicit in McGuigan's extravagant praise. Howard Winstone, who lost the end of the fingers of his right hand, was a brilliant featherweight who fought superbly against the formidably strong Vicente Saldivar, a fight that Hugh McIlvanney said so memorably had really been settled in the womb.

The Welsh heavyweight Tommy Farr's campaigning in America led him to a performance so fine and durable against the great Joe Louis that it provoked the building of beacon fires of celebration.

McGuigan's blanket assessment of Calzaghe's performance as the greatest in British fight history also laid waste the rankings of other great men of the earlier days, when they fought to live without the biannual underpinning of pay-per-view millions. Men like Jimmy Wilde, Jim Driscoll, Ted Kid Lewis and Jack Kid Berg.

Calzaghe's fellow Welshmen, Wilde, the Mighty Atom, and Peerless Jim Driscoll, for example, warranted at least a fleeting thought here on Sunday when Calzaghe, congratulated himself on concluding his career with a flourish in America that consisted, like it or not, of two victories over opponents with a combined age of 82 years, one of whom, Jones, revealing himself to be utterly shot from the third round onwards.

Driscoll also campaigned in America, where the locals were soon won over by the sweetness of his style, one in sharp contrast to the prevailing fashion there for much more overt aggression. Peerless Jim fought 571 rounds as a professional and lost four times in 77 fights. It is different strokes for different times, of course, but if part of the reason for Calzaghe's elevation is longevity and an unbeaten record in 46 fights, only two of which happened in America, what chance would anyone give him of going another 31 fights, against the toughest possible opposition, without any blemish? It would be an impractical demand on even the formidable gifts of Calzaghe. If you say the past is the past, and no longer has any relevance to the present, what then can we anticipate in the future, if not still more blurring of the verities of time?

No one can really blame Calzaghe for riding his success, nor the complaints he made about his previous exclusions before winning the BBC Sports Personality of the Year award. He was right to speak up for his hard trade and his own contribution to it, and perhaps he did that in the nick of time when we note the boiling controversies involving the current claims of such as Olympic stars Rebecca Adlington and Chris Hoy and the apparently inevitable triumph of Lewis Hamilton.

The worry is that we are now far gone in a sports culture where the headlines of today tend to obliterate the meaning of some of the greatest achievements in the history of sport, and so many of the standards they created.

None of this was any concern of Calzaghe when he emerged on a brilliant Manhattan Sunday sporting the wounds acquired when Roy Jones Jnr produced his one moment of authentic menace, a first-round knockdown which had disturbing implications for the Welshman no longer, it seemed, than it took him to clear his head, a feat comfortably accomplished by the end of the round.

He spoke of the pleasure of a man fulfilled – and also dismissed talk of a possible last fight against his most potentially challenging opponent, the 26-year-old unbeaten world light heavyweight champion Chad Dawson.

"They're talking about Dawson but that doesn't get me so excited," said Calzaghe. "He's won a couple of fights and beaten [Antonio] Tarver, a shot fighter."

Here, though, Calzaghe cast something of a shadow over the meaning of his American adventures.

Tarver will celebrate his 40th birthday in a few days' time, it is true, but then that makes him a mere two months older than Jones. It gets worse from the point of view of Joe's deification. Three years ago Tarver outpointed Jones. Six months later he blasted him away in two rounds. A few weeks ago Dawson knocked down Tarver before making him look like an irredeemably old man in a unanimous points decision.

Mere details, of course, but when you put a few of them together they make a rather different mosaic to the one produced by Barry McGuigan in the television studio. McGuigan's picture is at odds with reality, and why is it so? Why have recent judgements been so inflated? It is no mystery, of course. It comes with the requirement to sell almost every morsel of our sport and if the major victim is truth, who, these days, really cares?

The point is that if someone like Barry McGuigan, with all his achievements and available perspective, is not fastidious about the truths of his most demanding sport, from whom can we expect proper care?

Praising Joe Calzaghe, acknowledging his talent and those occasions when it was required to be fully exercised, is no hardship for anyone. But at various stages we encounter the problem of an excessive price to pay. One of them is wiping away the achievements of a man like Jim Driscoll. That, no doubt, was not Barry McGuigan's intention, but who can say it was not the effect?

You cannot say that Joe Calzaghe is the best without diminishing so many who went before him. Surely, it cannot be done.
The problem with this is that Lawton is a football writer who comes from the school that everything was better in the old days, whereas he doesn't really know his facts.
For instance, "Tommy Farr's campaigning in America led him to a performance so fine and durable against the great Joe Louis that it provoked the building of beacon fires of celebration" sounds great but has no basis in truth. Farr against Louis was Farr's first fight in the US and he was handpicked as an easy first defence. He boxed four times after that fight in the US, but lost the lot.
Guys like Lawton here buzzwords like Farr, Driscoll, Stracey and Cooper and get teary-eyed, because they don't really have a clue what they are talking about. So he goes to the complete opposite of McGuigan and has the cheek to criticise.
How many of that lot were even proven as the best in their division? Excellent article it certainly isn't.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by DavidPayne »

For all the last bugle feel it has and the entirely obvious flaws of claiming Henry Cooper's dropping of Clay measured up against Calzaghe's career - himself overlooking Cooper's capitulation in world-class company elsewhere and his overt avidance of Sonny Liston too - there are some truths in the sentiment of Lawton's piece.

This was roughly equivalent to Marciano-Louis, or Holmes-Ali, it wasn't really, even a fascimile of Jones' prime and to claim anything other than that is misleading - which is essentially the core point Lawton is driving at.

McGuigan does position himself as the ipso-facto historian on ITV coverage, and as such must be careful not to dilute history in order to magnify the present, I know he has a cotnract to keep but he has said Khan was the best lightweight in Europe, ready for a world-title shot and then immediatley revisionist when he was sparked out.

Additionally, a plain and simple context was required to measure Calzaghe performance and the meaning of the victory.

That said, I haven't read what Barry said about the fight afterward.
ArtOfWar
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1253
Joined: 24 Oct 2003, 11:54

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by ArtOfWar »

I just hope he doesn't leave everyone hanging with his decision. Either retire or don't, it's simple. Personally he's not a fighter I will miss. All those years of fighting no names with padded records can never be erased from my mind.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Autobarn »

Yeah, might be best if he just retires. Leave everyone else to get on with it. I'm sure more interesting and meaningful fare could do with the TV dates instead of some gurning show off who will only fight on the seniors circuit, a sign that he has "made it".

Light heavyweight could get interesting. With Johnson as dangerous as ever, Dawson an impressive young champ, exciting prospects Cloud and Shumenov.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45233
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Great stuff from James Lawton, a man who never tows the party line - I'm a great admirer of his work, and utterly concur with his viewpoint.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by DavidPayne »

I'm an admirer of Lawton's style but he's often basing his opinion on poor foundations. Contrary for the sake of it can wear thin.
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28486
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Coco »

To be honest there aren´t any fighters out there which will improve his legacy, and JC may avoid those fights anyway, nevertheless there are some big money fights about.

Froch may be the best but is unproven at the level and Mick is talking bout 5 million quid.
Erdei and Abrams would never take it.
Dawson and Pavlik are hype jobs.
Kessler and Hopkins is old ground.
Taylor is nothing special.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Autobarn »

Why is Dawson a hype job? He's getting a raw deal on this forum. Is a narrow win over Glen Johnson worst than a SD over Robin Reid?

One person said that Dawson was the new Pavlik, and Pavlik was the new Lacy, which I found absurd. Just compare the performances of Dawson and Lacy v Epifanio Mendoza and see who is best.

I don't think the question is a fight for Joe's legacy. Joe only did two fights that would really qualify - Lacy and Kessler, maybe Hopkins - as cementing any legacy. It's about money money money and only Hopkins brings it (thought the fight will be a mess again).

Hopkins has got in Joe's head. Joe scraped by. When he talks of the fight, he goes on and on, "I kicked his ass, I kicked his ass, I kicked his ass", "He lost to a white boy, he lost to a white boy" - as if to convince himself.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by DavidPayne »

Dawson is a very exciting new contender. No question.

He may well suffer in the way Joe did with the immenent retirement of those from whom he could squeeze credibility.

I really think Dawson is the one fighter capable of beating Joe, Hop etc right now.

Good talent.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45233
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

DavidPayne wrote:I'm an admirer of Lawton's style but he's often basing his opinion on poor foundations. Contrary for the sake of it can wear thin.
Disagree entirely where this article is concerned.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by DavidPayne »

Saying Calzaghe's performance is over-stated when compared to Henry Cooper's career?

Nah, its flawed.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by leforge »

Dawson will only get better. I like Joe but Jones was washed up years ago I dont why people making out like it was a great result it was an obvious outcome Knock down aside. Fight Dawson or Kessler again, or Froch if he beats Pascal in Cardiff over 70,000 will go for that one.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45233
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Well yes, some of the comparisons aren't great, but the general tone of the piece is spot on, and one of the only realistic assessments of his career I've seen in the papers since his 'historic' victory over Jones Jr.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by leforge »

The fight after round 3 was so one sided, in his own book he admitted Jones was past it, it was easy money at the end of the day. I dont think Joe would have beaten the Hopkins who fought Pavlik.
Max Molyneux
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7084
Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by Max Molyneux »

Why is Dawson a hype job? He's getting a raw deal on this forum. Is a narrow win over Glen Johnson worst than a SD
over Robin Reid?[/quote

Yes, Reid was more prime and fresh, plus Joe had the hand problem.

Johnson Is slow and can't punch for tofee and was making Dawson struggle for dear life because of workrate and because Dawson has a shaky jaw.
The fight after round 3 was so one sided, in his own book he admitted Jones was past it, it was easy money at the end of the day. I dont think Joe would have beaten the Hopkins who fought Pavlik.
The fight after round 3 was so one sided, in his own book he admitted Jones was past it, it was easy money at the end of the day. I dont think Joe would have beaten the Hopkins who fought Pavlik.
It's not hard for decent world class fighters to expose Pavlik.

Is the article making out their are better Welsh/British fighters because thats bullshit If It's true, a couple maybe but they wern't as talented. He's mentioning guys who never even won a title.
mark thompson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 662
Joined: 05 Sep 2008, 05:13

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by mark thompson »

In my opinion if Calzaghe fought and beat Dawson convincingly then people would say Dawson was over hyped like they did with Lacy he's in a no win situation especially with people on here .
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45233
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Really?

How come nobody is saying Kessler is a hype job then?

If Joe beats a young, hungry, and genuine champion at LH, in Dawson, then I think that goes a long way to silencing his critics. His career is never going to be beyond reproach, but it proves a major point.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by leforge »

Kessler was good win, dont think he repeat it but very good win. Dawson is not hype job. Lacy was good win had beaten some good competition.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Excellent Article on Calzaghe...

Post by DavidPayne »

My only counter to this is, how old were light-heavies Moore, Charles and heavies Louis and Walcott when Marciano fought them, and at least two dropped him, if I'm not mistaken?

We rever Marciano's 49-0 but he too, lacked his natural contemporary but is forgiven because of his style.

We forgive Dempsey for the ommissions from his resume too.

And Tyson is also widely forgiven for knock-overs when harder hitting more capable guys were operating.

Calzaghe is a curious subject. I've written more about him than anyone else and still I cannot capture how I feel about him.

I cheer him and I smile when he's knocked down. I applaud his brilliance but point out his shortcomings. It almost depends which side of bed I get out.

He will always remain an infuriating subject, but I will miss him when he retires.
Post Reply