Scathing Calzaghe attack

mark thompson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 662
Joined: 05 Sep 2008, 05:13

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by mark thompson »

fist wrote:Here we go again, same old bollocks, arm chair pundits throwing arrows from the safety of their homes, mentioning names of supposed big fights that Joe ducked - either average fighters, or fighters from different weight classes or fighters that pulled out of fighting Calzaghe.

As a SMW no one is better. He unified, he won every belt. I dont care too much for his move up in weight, but it showed he is no doubt one of the very best LHWs at the moment. His legacy is secured and he is one of the best if not THE best British boxers of all time. Ive enjoyed his fights and enjoyed his style. He's celebrated by many, including world class boxers past and present. Great achievement for a boxer to win Sports personality last year, and he's been recieving the recognition that his talent and achievements deserve.

IMO he can retire knowing he acheived the lot - world champion status, undisputed. One of the best SMWs there has been.

Superb comments fist :TU: :TU:
lowersmiths
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by lowersmiths »

even the biggest calzaghe fans have to see the irony in him complaining about there being too many belts in boxing, when he held the joke WBO title for so long.
ALI
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2667
Joined: 27 Nov 2003, 14:10

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by ALI »

gobbles wrote:There are plenty of thing Calzaghe is, but I don't see him as a wasted talent.

1. He is a product of a period when boxing was buried on Sky, thus he lacked the wide profile to become a crossover star, which in turn led to a lack of opportunities on a bigger stage

2. I think his perceived lack of ambition comes from a) coming from off the beaten boxing track and not really having advisers of what to do other than his promoters; b) his early bad dealings with Mickey Duff and Terry Lawless; c) shyness; d) lazyness.

3. Many of his best years were spoiled by injuries and the breakdown of his marriage

4. Being in a poor division with a complete lack of opportunities and holding a belt which others felt happy to rubbish, even though the WBC belt was the poorest during his reign with a string of second-rate champions.

5. Being one of allegedly allegedly's few stars, which meant he had to fulfil a set number of TV dates.
You could probably wipe old Adolf's slate clean if you thought about it for long enough.

Black is white and insides out and all that shenanagins! :roll:
tony3
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 140
Joined: 27 Apr 2007, 15:10

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by tony3 »

All of this internet-wide Calzaghe bashing is a ridiculous overreaction to a few off-handed remarks.
Chambers2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6499
Joined: 24 Feb 2004, 07:24

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by Chambers2 »

tony3 wrote:All of this internet-wide Calzaghe bashing is a ridiculous overreaction to a few off-handed remarks.
It's also due to his unwillingness to fight the new generation of fighters
Chambers2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6499
Joined: 24 Feb 2004, 07:24

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by Chambers2 »

Hopkins responds to Calzaghe's comments!
Hopkins livid over Calzaghe's comments
Posted December 13th 2008 at 12:17am
By Michael RosenthalBuzz up!

Bernard Hopkins has two words for Joe Calzaghe: “Shut up.”

Calzaghe, THE RING light heavyweight champ who is mulling retirement, told the Associated Press a few days ago that he’s glad he’ll soon be leaving the sport because it’s in dire shape.

“I think boxing is a dying sport. Globally – in America for instance – you've got UFC, which has taken a lot off boxing, business-wise," Calzaghe said.

He went on: “There is too much politics in boxing, too many belts and too many champions, which dilutes real champions like myself. There are four world champions in each division and it's bad because there are no stars any more. It's a big problem.”

Calzaghe also took a shot at boxing in the United States, pointing out that only one American (Deontay Wilder) won a medal in the 2008 Olympics.

“America only had one medalist in the Olympics this year," Calzaghe said. "In Britain, we did pretty good, but I'm glad I'm ending my career and not starting it because I don't think it's going to be that great in the future.”

Hopkins, who lost a close decision to Calzaghe in April and wants a rematch, finds Calzaghe’s comments both interesting and infuriating, the latter because of his enduring love of the sport and probably because it remains his livlihood.

The former middleweight titleholder pointed out that Calzaghe does not attract many fans outside his native Wales, meaning he’s part of the problem. Even Englishman Ricky Hatton, Hopkins said, has a bigger following than Calzaghe.

“I don’t know where he’s been, on Mars or something,” Hopkins said. “Maybe he missed the numbers that (Oscar De La Hoya-Manny Pacquaio) generated – 1.25 million pay-per-view buys in a recession. That’s 70, 80 million dollars in revenue. And he’s says boxing is dead?

“Maybe it’s dead when he fights.”

Hopkins was just getting started.

“If he wants to retire, he should go ahead and retire and keep his mouth shut. He has his wins (this year), his undefeated record. He should go join his family. Other than that, he should shut up. And tell him Bernard says that.”

Calzaghe wasn’t finished either. He also made some comments about De La Hoya after his dismal performance on Saturday, indicating that he didn’t want to go out in a similar manner.

“De La Hoya hasn’t been a real fighter for years,” he told walesonline.co.uk. “You can’t fault the guy because he has been a great fighter in the past and made so much money from the sport. But, realistically, he has been a part-time boxer for years.”

De La Hoya has fought four times in the past 2½ years.

“That’s jealousy, envy,” said Hopkins, a partner in De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions. “They [Calzaghe vs. Roy Jones Jr.] didn’t do well on pay-per-view, under 300,000. So when you start hearing things like that, it’s just jealousy. …

“It’s easy to kick someone when they’re down. I’m not saying this because I’m his friend and a partner, but Oscar’s record speaks for itself. Look at what he’s acccomplished over 20 years.”
fist
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 520
Joined: 01 May 2003, 06:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by fist »

tony3 wrote:All of this internet-wide Calzaghe bashing is a ridiculous overreaction to a few off-handed remarks.
A minority spewing bollocks. As for the comments Calzaghe made, I agree with most of what he said - he was spot on about DLH, and it wasnt even a scathing comment, just observational about Oscar not being hungry anymore and arguably dried up. As for Boxing dying, his point in context makes sense - boxing is not what it was, MMA does play a role now and the fact we dont get boxing on terrestrial also diminsishes boxers profiles. Yes you get the odd big match, but in terms of public interest it simply is not what it was.

Anyway, regardless of whether you agree, hardly controversial points by Calzaghe.

The likes of Hopkins and his fans are just bitter, because Joe was victorious...as always.
Captain Hook
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4730
Joined: 07 May 2007, 09:40

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by Captain Hook »

Chambers2 wrote:
tony3 wrote:All of this internet-wide Calzaghe bashing is a ridiculous overreaction to a few off-handed remarks.
It's also due to his unwillingness to fight the new generation of fighters
How many of them do you want him to fight?! There will always be another Kessler, Lacy......it could go on forever :)

And after Froch's brave yet poor defensive showing against Pascal I wouldn't advise that one.

Up until that fight I'd have picked Froch to win it.......
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27503
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by stujones »

just Dawson for me, unless of course there is a unification battle at Super Middle, and I would like to see the winner fight Joe.

I wouldn't be too excited for Froch vs Joe as it stands.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by DavidPayne »

Calzaghe was a world-class fighter, with 'only' a very good resume.

The list of ommissions is long and lengthy.

But then if you look at Louis, Ali, Monzon, Hopkins, Jones Jnr......they all had gimmes'.

Glen Catley is the one which annoys me the most in around 1999, 2000.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

ALI wrote:
gobbles wrote:There are plenty of thing Calzaghe is, but I don't see him as a wasted talent.

1. He is a product of a period when boxing was buried on Sky, thus he lacked the wide profile to become a crossover star, which in turn led to a lack of opportunities on a bigger stage

2. I think his perceived lack of ambition comes from a) coming from off the beaten boxing track and not really having advisers of what to do other than his promoters; b) his early bad dealings with Mickey Duff and Terry Lawless; c) shyness; d) lazyness.

3. Many of his best years were spoiled by injuries and the breakdown of his marriage

4. Being in a poor division with a complete lack of opportunities and holding a belt which others felt happy to rubbish, even though the WBC belt was the poorest during his reign with a string of second-rate champions.

5. Being one of allegedly allegedly allegedly's few stars, which meant he had to fulfil a set number of TV dates.
You could probably wipe old Adolf's slate clean if you thought about it for long enough.

Black is white and insides out and all that shenanagins! :roll:
No danger of you thinking too long about anything, is there ALI? Just sit down and type the first thought that enters your head
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

DavidPayne wrote:Calzaghe was a world-class fighter, with 'only' a very good resume.

The list of ommissions is long and lengthy.

But then if you look at Louis, Ali, Monzon, Hopkins, Jones Jnr......they all had gimmes'.

Glen Catley is the one which annoys me the most in around 1999, 2000.
I think Catley had to do a mandatory straight away and lost it.
forcefraser
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5450
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 06:15

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by forcefraser »

Lennox Lewis is the best boxer to come out of Britain, not Calzaghe.

Prince Naseem would be above Calzaghe for me.

In respect of Dawson, who gives a shit how many tickets he can sell. If he is the best around to challenge Calzaghe and Calzaghe wants to fight on, he should fight the best challenger. Simple as.
DavidPayne
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6248
Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by DavidPayne »

gobbles wrote:
DavidPayne wrote:Calzaghe was a world-class fighter, with 'only' a very good resume.

The list of ommissions is long and lengthy.

But then if you look at Louis, Ali, Monzon, Hopkins, Jones Jnr......they all had gimmes'.

Glen Catley is the one which annoys me the most in around 1999, 2000.
I think Catley had to do a mandatory straight away and lost it.
I'm sure he would have turned down Calzaghe money for his mandatory? Perhaps he would.
tonyevs
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5844
Joined: 08 Feb 2004, 18:13

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by tonyevs »

Captain Hook wrote:Shame Bernard Hopkins didn't show as much fire when they fought each other!
:D .. too true :D

Its fashionable now to knock Calzaghe :roll:

Sure the large majority of his career was somewhat lacklustre ... but that can be said about alot of other hall of famers too.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Chambers2 wrote:Hopkins responds to Calzaghe's comments!
Hopkins livid over Calzaghe's comments
Posted December 13th 2008 at 12:17am
By Michael RosenthalBuzz up!

Bernard Hopkins has two words for Joe Calzaghe: “Shut up.”

Calzaghe, THE RING light heavyweight champ who is mulling retirement, told the Associated Press a few days ago that he’s glad he’ll soon be leaving the sport because it’s in dire shape.

“I think boxing is a dying sport. Globally – in America for instance – you've got UFC, which has taken a lot off boxing, business-wise," Calzaghe said.

He went on: “There is too much politics in boxing, too many belts and too many champions, which dilutes real champions like myself. There are four world champions in each division and it's bad because there are no stars any more. It's a big problem.”

Calzaghe also took a shot at boxing in the United States, pointing out that only one American (Deontay Wilder) won a medal in the 2008 Olympics.

“America only had one medalist in the Olympics this year," Calzaghe said. "In Britain, we did pretty good, but I'm glad I'm ending my career and not starting it because I don't think it's going to be that great in the future.”

Hopkins, who lost a close decision to Calzaghe in April and wants a rematch, finds Calzaghe’s comments both interesting and infuriating, the latter because of his enduring love of the sport and probably because it remains his livlihood.

The former middleweight titleholder pointed out that Calzaghe does not attract many fans outside his native Wales, meaning he’s part of the problem. Even Englishman Ricky Hatton, Hopkins said, has a bigger following than Calzaghe.

“I don’t know where he’s been, on Mars or something,” Hopkins said. “Maybe he missed the numbers that (Oscar De La Hoya-Manny Pacquaio) generated – 1.25 million pay-per-view buys in a recession. That’s 70, 80 million dollars in revenue. And he’s says boxing is dead?

“Maybe it’s dead when he fights.”

Hopkins was just getting started.

“If he wants to retire, he should go ahead and retire and keep his mouth shut. He has his wins (this year), his undefeated record. He should go join his family. Other than that, he should shut up. And tell him Bernard says that.”

Calzaghe wasn’t finished either. He also made some comments about De La Hoya after his dismal performance on Saturday, indicating that he didn’t want to go out in a similar manner.

“De La Hoya hasn’t been a real fighter for years,” he told walesonline.co.uk. “You can’t fault the guy because he has been a great fighter in the past and made so much money from the sport. But, realistically, he has been a part-time boxer for years.”

De La Hoya has fought four times in the past 2½ years.

“That’s jealousy, envy,” said Hopkins, a partner in De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions. “They [Calzaghe vs. Roy Jones Jr.] didn’t do well on pay-per-view, under 300,000. So when you start hearing things like that, it’s just jealousy. …

“It’s easy to kick someone when they’re down. I’m not saying this because I’m his friend and a partner, but Oscar’s record speaks for itself. Look at what he’s acccomplished over 20 years.”

Four times in 2 1/2 years..................sounds rather like Calzaghe, he fights twice a year. What's the difference.

Oscar was old and shouldn't have fought at 147 - simple as. Calzaghe has no right to knock Oscar at all.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

tonyevs wrote:
Captain Hook wrote:Shame Bernard Hopkins didn't show as much fire when they fought each other!
:D .. too true :D

Its fashionable now to knock Calzaghe :roll:

Sure the large majority of his career was somewhat lacklustre ... but that can be said about alot of other hall of famers too.
Personally, when I'm bored I love watching the Hopkins-Robert Allen trilogy
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

Four times in 2 1/2 years..................sounds rather like Calzaghe, he fights twice a year. What's the difference.

Oscar was old and shouldn't have fought at 147 - simple as. Calzaghe has no right to knock Oscar at all.[/quote]




Oscar has boxed tree times in 2 1/2 years, Calzaghe boxed five times in that period, as has Hatton, while Hopkins has boxed four times. What's your point James?
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

Terry D wrote:
Captain Hook wrote:I wasn't sure about your Kessler prediction, hence the question mark.

But Kessler was a far more dangerous opponent in my opinion.

He won them both handily.

To describe Hopkins as clean and correct considering the way he fights is wide of the mark IMO. We'll agree to disagree, but I had him losing by two...

I'm no Calzaghe lover, but credit where it's due for those three performances.

He still gets criticised for taking on an "over-the-hill" Hopkins yet he has proven by beating Pavlik, and your score card, that he is still a stern test for anyone.
Hopkins is clean, he lands clean blows. People cannot say 'Hopkins only throws when he is sure to land' and then say he is a messy puncher. He does clinch, but that is clinching, not punching. Generally when he does land he lands clean, blows on the hips inside aside.

Why should we give Joe credit for three fights in a 40+ fight career? It is an insult to genuine greats.

For too long we have argued about Joe, saying that allegedly allegedly held him back, then he splits with Warren and rips the piss with the Jones fight. You have to conclude that Joe is the BA Barrackas of boxing, getting him into a competitive fights must have been a nightmare, as shown by the Lacy experience.

Enzo and Frank: "You have to take this fight Joe."

Joe: "My hand is killing me man. Can't we call it off? Tell him my dog ate my homework, and stole all my money. Tell him I can't play because it is raining."

Enzo and Frank: "Jesus Joe, the fight is literally right here. You have to fight him or people will call you a coward."

Joe: "Don't care. Can't even spell the word so it can't be true."

Enzo winks to Frank, gets a glass of milk.

Enzo and Frank: "Hey Joe. Got a nice glass of milkie here for you, it will be good for your hands."

Joe drinks the milk, wakes up a few hours later and he is in the ring with Lacy, has to fight. Wins, stands on the cusp of a real career. Takes on Bika. Everyone groans. Repeat until everyone dies of boredom.
Hopkins landed as much with his head as his right in that fight - is that clean?

Were you moaning at Collazo, Urango, Lazcano in the same way? Some would say Ricky spent years (and as many fights as Calzaghe) fighting the likes of Pederson and Vilches. But since Tszyu, has he beaten anybody to match at Kessler or a Hopkins? Of course not. That's not a criticism of Ricky, you fight who is there, but let's put this into some kind of perspective.

What is most revolting is that the criticism of Calzaghe is seeming so personal. I can't even begin to understand your motivation for that dumb milk speech. You seem to be trying to make out that Calzaghe to be some sort of coward - how outrageous for anyone who claims to be a boxing fan.

Why did Jones "rip the piss"? Was Jones a worth top ten contender, of course he was. You are trying to make out he was Bobby Gunn.

Calzaghe has been fantastic for British boxing, I don't see how anyone could argue with that.
hitman_hatton1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6150
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by hitman_hatton1 »

Terry D wrote:and he would still be ignoring Froch in order to prepare for Veit IV 'The push for the final bell'.
:lol:
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

Terry D wrote:Nope, I actually think Urango is not that bad. Hatton's fights post-Tszyu were a means to an end, he wanted to fight Floyd. He went away, fought the fights required, such as moving up (to follow Floyd) to fight Collazo, and went for the P4P #1 fighter when Floyd was in his prime, and he also had the sense to realise that he had to go to Floyd.

For all the whingeing about the aborted Hopkins-Joe fight way back when the truth is that Joe had Jones and Hopkins in and around his division when they were P4P #1, and when they still had a lot left. He refused to entertain the idea of fighting them on foreign soil and instead opted to fight a load of completely directionless fights.

Of his recent big fights two, Lacy and Kessler, only came about because the other guy was willing to take risks, and the other two, Joe and Hopkins, only came about because Joe was prepared to travel to face old men.

If Kessler or Lacy had been that bit more stubborn the SMW division would be completely fracture and Joe would be calling them names from the safety of Wales, and he would still be ignoring Froch in order to prepare for Veit IV 'The push for the final bell'.

Fair enough, I actually understood what Enzo C meant in his 'grail and Percival' rant, that does not mean that I have to support it.
The problem is, you have absolutely no idea what opportunities Calzaghe has had. Calzaghe has only had the opportunities he has had. Just as "he should have fought Jones at his peak", who says Jones wanted to fight him?
Or why should he go to America to fight Jones for about £100,000 when he could fight at home for £600,000. Is that a lack of ambition? Why don't you chuck in your job and go and work for someone for nothing?
Lewis could have fought Bowe, but he wanted 50-50 rather than 75-25 for Bowe. Does that make him useless? Lewis had his biggest wins over an old Holyfield and a washed-up Tyson and never fought them in their prime.
Hatton was smart in working out all his own deals. So HBO paid him, Dennis Hobson paid him and Sky paid him and he grabbed all the money - that's why the undercards on all those Hobson/Hatton cards were so terrible.
It got him the fight with Mayweather, yet if Mayweather saw Hatton as a threat, would he have taken it?
Calzaghe has not been a huge name in America. So a Jones or a Hopkins is just as adapt as working out a value/risk assessment. Jones could have fought Michalczewski, but fought Glen Kelly.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

Terry D wrote:Nope, I actually think Urango is not that bad. Hatton's fights post-Tszyu were a means to an end, he wanted to fight Floyd. He went away, fought the fights required, such as moving up (to follow Floyd) to fight Collazo, and went for the P4P #1 fighter when Floyd was in his prime, and he also had the sense to realise that he had to go to Floyd.

For all the whingeing about the aborted Hopkins-Joe fight way back when the truth is that Joe had Jones and Hopkins in and around his division when they were P4P #1, and when they still had a lot left. He refused to entertain the idea of fighting them on foreign soil and instead opted to fight a load of completely directionless fights.

Of his recent big fights two, Lacy and Kessler, only came about because the other guy was willing to take risks, and the other two, Joe and Hopkins, only came about because Joe was prepared to travel to face old men.

If Kessler or Lacy had been that bit more stubborn the SMW division would be completely fracture and Joe would be calling them names from the safety of Wales, and he would still be ignoring Froch in order to prepare for Veit IV 'The push for the final bell'.

Fair enough, I actually understood what Enzo C meant in his 'grail and Percival' rant, that does not mean that I have to support it.
The problem is, you have absolutely no idea what opportunities Calzaghe has had. Calzaghe has only had the opportunities he has had. Just as "he should have fought Jones at his peak", who says Jones wanted to fight him?
Or why should he go to America to fight Jones for about £100,000 when he could fight at home for £600,000. Is that a lack of ambition? Why don't you chuck in your job and go and work for someone for nothing?
Lewis could have fought Bowe, but he wanted 50-50 rather than 75-25 for Bowe. Does that make him useless? Lewis had his biggest wins over an old Holyfield and a washed-up Tyson and never fought them in their prime.
Hatton was smart in working out all his own deals. So HBO paid him, Dennis Hobson paid him and Sky paid him and he grabbed all the money - that's why the undercards on all those Hobson/Hatton cards were so terrible.
It got him the fight with Mayweather, yet if Mayweather saw Hatton as a threat, would he have taken it?
Calzaghe has not been a huge name in America. So a Jones or a Hopkins is just as adapt as working out a value/risk assessment. Jones could have fought Michalczewski, but fought Glen Kelly.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

What we can say without doubt - is that until the last three years of his career - Calzaghe failed to face his peers, and the best of the divisions from 160-175, now you can blame who you want for that, but at some point you have to question Calzaghe's own desire to face the best.

I think Calzaghe has a pathological fear of losing, he is always going on about being beaten when he was an amateur - and the fact he pulled out against Johnson 3 times, and wanted to pull out against Lacy and Kessler before he was talked into them by his dad, indicates someone who lacks confidence until they actually get between the ropes.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by gobbles »

Terry D wrote:We are not talking about a six-twos boxer here, Joe had opportunities, he was not a boxing pauper. If you are trying to say he was not on Jones's radar due to fighting over here then why did Joe never refuse a SN contract, signing a 3-fight deal to fight in the USA instead, therefore forcing a fight with Jones in the process. This would not be a 'I have just won the WBO title, give me your biggest star' moment, it would have been a building option, instead he seemed happy to stay here fighting a stream of poor guys in order to build his record and bank balance.

As for me chucking in my job, that is similar to someone having a debate over the Iraq war only for someone to get all emotive and cry, "What if your son was out there?" This is not about me and my job, it is about a prizefighter who consistently failed to even look like he wanted to take on the biggest challenges.

At least be consistent, at one point you are saying he was right to fight Jones as maybe Jones would not have known who he was, although Jones knew who Eubank was, even talking about him after the Byrd bout (the night Eubank lost to Collins), so maybe Roy did know who he was. Then you raise another point saying Joe should have stayed at home fighting Tocker's for £600,000, now, boxing finance issues bore me, but I am not sure how accurate that figure is, nor that a fight with Jones would have got him less than a Pudwill fight.

As for Bowe-Lewis. They were mandated to fight one another and Bowe pulled out of te running, so no, I do not think Lewis was useless. By that point Lewis had played the game abroad, had fought a dangerous guy and went on to go all out to unify the belts. Unlike Joe, Lewis was frozen out because of his independent stance, not because of his attitude or the attitude of his promotional outfit. It is a silly comparison really. I have just wasted my own time answering it as well, but on I go.

Lewis never fought a prime Tyson because the fight was hindered by King, who knew Lewis was too wily for him and Tyson both. Instead Lewis took the step-aside money (and before you start he had no choice, they would have just vacated the belt) in the understanding that Tyson would have one gimme and then fight Lewis. Tyson fought his gimme, Holyfield, lost and Holyfield then eventually honoured this agreement. That, in broad strokes, is why Lewis got Holyfield and Tyson when he did. It was certainly not down to the fact that he preferred staying at home fighting the likes of Pudwill (mention Justin Fortune here by all means, that was an exception, rather than the norm).

Would Mayweather have taken the Hatton fight if he saw Hatton as a threat? Hmm, well he took on Corrales who was then an even bigger threat. Mayweather has a fighter's mentality.

Jones could have fought D-Man, well done a sensible comment rears its head, but he openly ducked him and demanded that D-Man travel and take the shit money. Jones could do that at that time. Calzaghe then did the exact same thing, only he did not have the basis Jones had (Jones had defeated Hopkins and Toney by this point, prior to Lacy Joe's CV was threadbare).
What a surprise, you bring up Tocker Pudwill, as if that was all he fought. Pudwill was a 10-day sub for Thomas Tate. Slag off the Thornberrys and Jiminezs but, honestly, Pudwill?? Who, is must be said, had taken Ottke the distance. You might as well slag off Hatton for facing Hutchinson.

Also wins over Woodhall, Mitchell, Brewer, Eubank and Reid are hardly nothing.

But what you are doing is rewriting history and playing fantasy boxing as you love to. "Go to America", and what? The reality is, if he didn't sign with Warren and went to America looking for a Jones fight, he would have been offered crap money and four options. American promoters don't give a crap about British boxers. Besides the fact that that wold seemingly involve him leaving his young family behind. Why should he do that? To please a few doubters like you?

He could only go where offers are. Had he gone to the US, maybe he might have got a fight on Showtime, maybe on ESPN. But any promoter who would have signed him would have said, 'you're a super-middleweight world champion, defend that'.

Did Hatton go to the US when he was defending his WBU title? No he kept re-signing with Warren. The options only began to open up for both after big wins at home.

Hatton's fights post-Tszyu were not all aimed at facing Floyd, they were all based on making the most money. He signed with Hobson because he offered the most money, if he had been after Mayweather he wold have taken an offer from the US and Golden Boy were interested then.

It is also in no way similar to an Iraq war argument, as you are making career decisions for one individual, not saying whether a war in legitimate based on an emotive personal argument.
Last edited by gobbles on 17 Dec 2008, 10:47, edited 1 time in total.
Autobarn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16093
Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 13:01

Re: Scathing Calzaghe attack

Post by Autobarn »

Eve Tate was a retread when he fought Ottke, and he fought Ottke twice. So he will have been an extra retread when he was supposed to fight Calzaghe.
Post Reply