Calzaghe - "I can beat Wlad Klitschko"

[Autobarn]

OK then 'fact' is a bit strong.

Kessler is 100 times better than anyone Froch has beaten and Calzaghe won going away.

If JC and FRoch fought it would be a watered down version of Joe v Lacy.

Speed v Plodder

Only answering though because you asked..................

Calzaghe would beat Wlad

FACT, also?

i like your facts

[lirva]

OK then 'fact' is a bit strong.

Kessler is 100 times better than anyone Froch has beaten and Calzaghe won going away.

If JC and FRoch fought it would be a watered down version of Joe v Lacy.

Speed v Plodder

Only answering though because you asked..................

Calzaghe would beat Wlad

FACT, also?

i like your facts

Of course its a fact. Joe beat lacy and hopkins and kessler. hes the best ever

[Wrists]

should have qualified this with 'in my opinion'.

Agree fact is the wrong word to use



Sick of all these threads now though

[DavidPayne]

Yawn, yawn, same old crap from the same old posters.

Calzaghe was a fantastic boxer, accept it.

So what if he says some dumb things? So what if he doesn't like Carl Froch - lots of boxers don't. Why? Because Froch has always made endless bitter, twisted comments doing other boxers down. And if he didn't make them, the Hennessy press releases did it for him. Ask Amir Khan what he thinks of Froch?

What is he meant to say, that he would have lost in the Super Six? He took the unification fights when he was offered them and he won them. His career wasn't built up on the BBC like Froch's was? Sky never got behind him like they did Ricky. Who is he supposed to have ducked?

1 - True. many people do hold opinions that they stick to.

2 - Agreed. Hence the frustration.

3 - Calzaghe comments both in early career when he acted like a smug twat and later when he was a smug twat are the equal of anythign Froch has said.

4 - Of course he shoudl say he'd have won the series and he's right to realise Froch could well get splattered.

5 - He may have took the unification fights but why did he fight patsies instead of entertaining brawlers like Green, Echols or Froch, why didn't he rematch Reid or take on name champions like Beyer or Lucas. Why wait until Brewer and Mitchell had both lost to Ottke before facing them. Why not stimulate fans with an Eastman fight, or tackle Clinton Woods or Glen Johnson at Light-Heavyweight. Why not tackle Glen Catley when he was WBC champion? A potentially thrilling fight? Why refuse to fight abroad until it was a patsy in Denmark or a £750k pay day in Germany for Veit II. And this is failing to mention Ottke his rival champion or the bigger names in the States like Hopkins and Jones. Not forgetting Tarver of course.

Would Federer be allowed to play and humiliate, despite losing the first set, middle-aged Borg and McEnroe and be allowed to call himself great because of it?

Nah would it bollacks.

Calzaghe was a great fighter with a so-so resume.

If Froch beats Dirrel, Kessler and Abraham he's trumped Calzaghe by some distance.

[lirva]

How do people think calzaghe would do if he came back and challenged Wlad at heavyweight?

Wlad by easy KO.

[lirva]

If Froch beats Dirrel, Kessler and Abraham he's trumped Calzaghe by some distance.

all Froch really needs at this point is a win over Kessler to trump ANYTHING Calzaghe achieved in his career.

Wins over Dirrell, Kessler and Abraham are there for the taking and if Froch does that, there can be no Calzaghe fan who would have a legitimate argument that Calzaghe has the better resume. At the present moment, it's debatable.

[doctorboxing]

Calzaghe was a great fighter with a so-so resume.

Most sensible thing on this thread.

Calzaghe was fantastic, one of Britains best ever but he could have done so much more with his career if he really wanted to.

As for beating Wlad................ being dropped by Jones and Hopkins does not give him much hope I'm afraid.

Could he beat Valuev? Thats a different question and yes I think he could have.

[DavidPayne]

Wouldn't it have been lovely to have seen this Super Six at 175 pounds.

1 - Roy Jones
2 - Bernard Hopkins
3 - Joe Calzaghe
4 - James Toney
5 - Sven Ottke
6 - Dariusz Michelcweski

Such a mix of styles. I hope nobody thinks I've been over emotive with the word 'lovely', I know we have some sensitive souls here.

[DavidPayne]

Calzaghe was a great fighter with a so-so resume.

Most sensible thing on this thread.

Calzaghe was fantastic, one of Britains best ever but he could have done so much more with his career if he really wanted to.

As for beating Wlad................ being dropped by Jones and Hopkins does not give him much hope I'm afraid.

Could he beat Valuev? Thats a different question and yes I think he could have.

Not forgetting Kabaret Slalom and Bygone Mitchell.

[Max Molyneux]

Ask yourselves this...

Would Joe Calzaghe have ever joined that Super Six tournament had it happened a few years ago?

No. That's one of a few reasons why he's one of the most overrated fighters of the last decade.

I agree 100%. He couldn't even beat an ancient Hopkins in most people's eyes. He had two good wins in all his time as champion, Kessler and Lacy. If he's so confident he can beat 'em all, then FIGHT them!

PUT UP OR SHUT UP JOE!

People are crazy if they thought Hopkins won that. He did nothing but fake fouls, cry and foul himself. Joe looked bad letting Hopkins do all that stuff though. Hopkins is a cheat, he has skill but he ain't no legend.

How do you guys know he wouldn't of done the tournement? The TV guys didn't think it up at the time to prove. Plus Ottke was the other belt holder at the time. I agree Froch won't last long in it, he won't win on lucky punches for long.

being dropped by Jones

Wasn't that legit though, the forearm landed, not the fist.

[Max Molyneux]

I wasn't disputing that though. Although he wasn't hurt, it was punch followed by holding which probably floored him rather than the punch itself.

Hopkins didn't win more than 3 rounds.

[Wrists]

Good ol Max..............

Hopkins won more than 3 rounds!!!

Lovin this thread...................

[doctorboxing]

I wasn't disputing that though. Although he wasn't hurt, it was punch followed by holding which probably floored him rather than the punch itself.

Hopkins didn't win more than 3 rounds.

Yes, boxers are often floored by holding

[RLewis]

Erm, Hopkins did floor Joe, with, like, a punch.

Do you really think Hopkins won that fight? I just can't see it. I had Joe up by 3 on the night and I struggle to make a case for Hopkins doing more than that. I even gave him the round he clearly cheated in by feining a low blow.

The problem with this endless debate is everyone has entrenched views, so sensible debate is always impossible.

Joe was a great fighter - certainly great in the realms of British boxing. Of course his record could have been much better. But not all his opponents were hopeless and he probably lost 5-6 defences because of injuries. Veit was far from a patsy, Mkrtchyan went to France and won the European title straight after fighting him. He was in a fairly glum division where the main rival champion did not want to face him and his promoter's TV deal gave no financial incentive to send him abroad or seek tougher fights, just as Jones's HBO contract gave him no incentive to persue a fight with Calzaghe or, more to the point, Michalczewski.

One thing I would say for sure is that the Taylor that fought Froch was several notches down from the Taylor that fought Hopkins (as was shown in the fights with Wright, Spinks and Ouma). Likewise the Lacy that went in with Calzaghe was a very different fighter from the one the has boxed since. Boxers are not computer programmes. It could well be that Froch is still improving, but Taylor and Lacy are as much on the slide as the Jones that fought Calzaghe.

[Autobarn]

Wouldn't it have been lovely to have seen this Super Six at 175 pounds.

1 - Roy Jones
2 - Bernard Hopkins
3 - Joe Calzaghe
4 - James Toney
5 - Sven Ottke
6 - Dariusz Michelcweski

Such a mix of styles. I hope nobody thinks I've been over emotive with the word 'lovely', I know we have some sensitive souls here.

reputations were too big, they had too much to protect, some of them had really cozy contracts to "merely" defend their titles, and others were too cautious and protective of what they had. i thik it would cost far too much.

[Autobarn]

Erm, Hopkins did floor Joe, with, like, a punch.

Do you really think Hopkins won that fight? I just can't see it. I had Joe up by 3 on the night and I struggle to make a case for Hopkins doing more than that. I even gave him the round he clearly cheated in by feining a low blow.

The problem with this endless debate is everyone has entrenched views, so sensible debate is always impossible.

Joe was a great fighter - certainly great in the realms of British boxing. Of course his record could have been much better. But not all his opponents were hopeless and he probably lost 5-6 defences because of injuries. Veit was far from a patsy, Mkrtchyan went to France and won the European title straight after fighting him. He was in a fairly glum division where the main rival champion did not want to face him and his promoter's TV deal gave no financial incentive to send him abroad or seek tougher fights, just as Jones's HBO contract gave him no incentive to persue a fight with Calzaghe or, more to the point, Michalczewski.

One thing I would say for sure is that the Taylor that fought Froch was several notches down from the Taylor that fought Hopkins (as was shown in the fights with Wright, Spinks and Ouma). Likewise the Lacy that went in with Calzaghe was a very different fighter from the one the has boxed since. Boxers are not computer programmes. It could well be that Froch is still improving, but Taylor and Lacy are as much on the slide as the Jones that fought Calzaghe.

Jones' HBO contract allowed him to earn a lot of money to face routine mandatories. I'll bet Joe was on nothing near what Jones was making, and had nowhere near the exposure. It did seem like a "safety in numbers" title run. I don't know why ppl are so forgiving about it. Joe did come good, but the early years were somewhere between frustrating and bullshit. It was not a good time to be a boxing fan when he was rematching Veit and slapping Ashira. Joe was considered rock bottom by most ppl who post on Internet forums.

Taylor - I wouldn't say he was as faded as RJJ was. Taylor said he was weight drained, so he moved up, and ppl bought it that he needed the extra pounds to be effective. He was effective, but he also showed that he struggles mightily vs bigger men: shame on Lou DiBella for matching him with so many light middles. He was a good first title defence for Carl Froch.

[Autobarn]

I wasn't disputing that though. Although he wasn't hurt, it was punch followed by holding which probably floored him rather than the punch itself.

Hopkins didn't win more than 3 rounds.

ho ho ho

you mean he didn't win 5 or 6 rounds?

are you sure?

[Autobarn]

Calzaghe can beat Wladimir - FACT

Calzaghe will be a "super promoter" - FACT!

[banjo]

Wouldn't it have been lovely to have seen this Super Six at 175 pounds.

1 - Roy Jones
2 - Bernard Hopkins
3 - Joe Calzaghe
4 - James Toney
5 - Sven Ottke
6 - Dariusz Michelcweski

Such a mix of styles. I hope nobody thinks I've been over emotive with the word 'lovely', I know we have some sensitive souls here.

Too many egos and not enough willingness to travel by any of them to have made that happen, would have been great but you'd have had more chance of getting blood from a stone than getting that tournament together.

[RLewis]

Erm, Hopkins did floor Joe, with, like, a punch.

Do you really think Hopkins won that fight? I just can't see it. I had Joe up by 3 on the night and I struggle to make a case for Hopkins doing more than that. I even gave him the round he clearly cheated in by feining a low blow.

The problem with this endless debate is everyone has entrenched views, so sensible debate is always impossible.

Joe was a great fighter - certainly great in the realms of British boxing. Of course his record could have been much better. But not all his opponents were hopeless and he probably lost 5-6 defences because of injuries. Veit was far from a patsy, Mkrtchyan went to France and won the European title straight after fighting him. He was in a fairly glum division where the main rival champion did not want to face him and his promoter's TV deal gave no financial incentive to send him abroad or seek tougher fights, just as Jones's HBO contract gave him no incentive to persue a fight with Calzaghe or, more to the point, Michalczewski.

One thing I would say for sure is that the Taylor that fought Froch was several notches down from the Taylor that fought Hopkins (as was shown in the fights with Wright, Spinks and Ouma). Likewise the Lacy that went in with Calzaghe was a very different fighter from the one the has boxed since. Boxers are not computer programmes. It could well be that Froch is still improving, but Taylor and Lacy are as much on the slide as the Jones that fought Calzaghe.

Jones' HBO contract allowed him to earn a lot of money to face routine mandatories. I'll bet Joe was on nothing near what Jones was making, and had nowhere near the exposure. It did seem like a "safety in numbers" title run. I don't know why ppl are so forgiving about it. Joe did come good, but the early years were somewhere between frustrating and bullshit. It was not a good time to be a boxing fan when he was rematching Veit and slapping Ashira. Joe was considered rock bottom by most ppl who post on Internet forums.

Taylor - I wouldn't say he was as faded as RJJ was. Taylor said he was weight drained, so he moved up, and ppl bought it that he needed the extra pounds to be effective. He was effective, but he also showed that he struggles mightily vs bigger men: shame on Lou DiBella for matching him with so many light middles. He was a good first title defence for Carl Froch.

Taylor was a fantastic first defence. The thing is, I thought Carl boxed a really bad fight, giving too much ground and being too much of a target for Taylor. He should learn from that, certainly when it comes to fights against guys like Abraham. What he did have, however, was the finisher to get himself out of a tricky situation, which is a mark of someone special.

[Autobarn]

yeah he did box poorly, but finished spectacularly. hopefully froch can find a more sensible style, where he gets to break ppl down, rather than gambling on late stoppages

[lirva]

I think people are underrating Frochs boxing ability. He has good punch selection and is deceptively fast and strong. A rock solid chin too.

As far as Joe vs Hopkins, the fight was close enough. I had it a draw, taking the knockdown into account.

It was close enough for many people to be offering 5/1 on Calzaghe winning on points on betfair when the fight was over. I definitely thought B-Hop was going to get the decision, especially with the knockdown.

[RLewis]

I think people are underrating Frochs boxing ability. He has good punch selection and is deceptively fast and strong. A rock solid chin too.

As far as Joe vs Hopkins, the fight was close enough. I had it a draw, taking the knockdown into account.

It was close enough for many people to be offering 5/1 on Calzaghe winning on points on betfair when the fight was over. I definitely thought B-Hop was going to get the decision, especially with the knockdown.

Power of the commentator in those odds.

[Eraserhead]

I thought Hopkins beat Calzaghe, too. I also thought he'd get the decision at the end, and was shocked when they went for Calzaghe.

I'm sorry, as lazy as Hopkins was down the stretch, you don't win fights by slapping your arms in circles and bum-rushing an opponent in sheer desperation. Joe was a panicked mess all night against Hopkins, as he quickly realised B-Hop was superior to him technically and could make him look silly when he opened up.

I honestly don't remember Calzaghe landing one clean, scoring shot in that whole fight. Hopkins didn't land much himself, but what he did throw landed and counted.

[Autobarn]

on the night i was surprised that hopkins got the nod, but i rewatched and tried to make a case for joe - and did due to some right hooks and straight lefts.