Joe Calzaghe- All time great?

[Controversial]

You also said that he fought all that was available - you forget Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, Anthony Mundine, Manny Siaca and Marcus Beyer who were all better than the mob that KC fought none was exactly SRR, JC avoided them like the plague.

Overrated bum, at best.

The fact you call him an overrated bum suggests to me you have little knowledge of boxing. For any fighter to remain unbeaten in 46 fights, making 21 defences of his title over a 10 year period is a hell of an achievement whether you like him or not. Pretty stupid and ignorant statement.

Do you honestly think Ottke, Lucas, Mundine, Siaca or Beyer would have beaten him even if they fought?

[BoxBuzz]

Ottke was undefeated as well, if they both would have met in real time, I'm afraid they both would have dematerialized, leaving no memory of either for humanity to ponder. Immovable object vs irresistable force sort of thing.

And perhaps that would not have been all bad.

[BoxBuzz]

You also said that he fought all that was available - you forget Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, Anthony Mundine, Manny Siaca and Marcus Beyer who were all better than the mob that KC fought none was exactly SRR, JC avoided them like the plague.

Overrated bum, at best.

The fact you call him an overrated bum suggests to me you have little knowledge of boxing. For any fighter to remain unbeaten in 46 fights, making 21 defences of his title over a 10 year period is a hell of an achievement whether you like him or not. Pretty stupid and ignorant statement.

Do you honestly think Ottke, Lucas, Mundine, Siaca or Beyer would have beaten him even if they fought?

All kidding aside, I have to ultimately agree that this was a remarkable achievment. And that he has Hopkins and Jones on his resume is about as compelling a story as there has ever been in boxing. Yes I know they were both washed up....but the record stands.....and Calzaghe owns it...like it or not.

[giacomino]

JC fought a line up including:

Branko Sobot
Juan Ferreyra
Rick Thornberry
Omar Sheika
Will Mcintyre
Pocker Tudwill
Mger Mkrtchyan
Kabery Salem
Evans Ashira
Sakio Bika
Peter Manfredo
......is simply the worst line up of any long term "champion" in the history of the sport.

Wrong. Erdei defended against:
Lakatos
Murdoch
Santiago
Blades
Mendoza
Abron
Barashian
The biggest wins he can claim at lt. heavyweight, besides his title-winning effort, were two close hometown decisions vs. Hugo Garay and a win over Euro-level Thomas Ulrich

Wonjongkam defended against:
Asai
Baba
Jesus Martinez
Mangubat
Hussein
Luis Angel Martinez
Kamatsu
Baas
Nakahiro
Everardo Morales
Shimizu
Masuda
and is scheduled to defend against a 14-4 C-level Suriyan Por Chokchai in October.
Before his recent good run of beating Miranda and Kameda, his best win over seven years of being champion the first time was over Naito, whom later outpointed him
Those, my friend, are crappier title fight lineups

[Knucklez]

You also said that he fought all that was available - you forget Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, Anthony Mundine, Manny Siaca and Marcus Beyer who were all better than the mob that KC fought none was exactly SRR, JC avoided them like the plague.

Overrated bum, at best.

The fact you call him an overrated bum suggests to me you have little knowledge of boxing. For any fighter to remain unbeaten in 46 fights, making 21 defences of his title over a 10 year period is a hell of an achievement whether you like him or not. Pretty stupid and ignorant statement.

Do you honestly think Ottke, Lucas, Mundine, Siaca or Beyer would have beaten him even if they fought?

"You have very little knowledge of boxing" = the standard retort of someone that can't think of a productive counter argument. Perhaps Current Scene would be more to your liking?

No, I think JC would have beaten all of the names you mention.............however, he didn't fight them. Mayweather is criticised in most quarters for ducking his peers, doesn't mean he wouldn't have beaten them. What matters is who you faced and defeated, not theoretical outcomes of fights that never happened. The simple fact is that JC fought a load of shite.

[Knucklez]

You also said that he fought all that was available - you forget Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, Anthony Mundine, Manny Siaca and Marcus Beyer who were all better than the mob that KC fought none was exactly SRR, JC avoided them like the plague.

Overrated bum, at best.

The fact you call him an overrated bum suggests to me you have little knowledge of boxing. For any fighter to remain unbeaten in 46 fights, making 21 defences of his title over a 10 year period is a hell of an achievement whether you like him or not. Pretty stupid and ignorant statement.

Do you honestly think Ottke, Lucas, Mundine, Siaca or Beyer would have beaten him even if they fought?

All kidding aside, I have to ultimately agree that this was a remarkable achievment. And that he has Hopkins and Jones on his resume is about as compelling a story as there has ever been in boxing. Yes I know they were both washed up....but the record stands.....and Calzaghe owns it...like it or not.

The notion that Calzaghe beating Roy Jones Jr is "as compelling a story as there have ever been in boxing" is prepostorous. Roy was coming off 3 losses in his previous 6 fights, 2 by KO, and was clearly a mile over the hill. There is little credit to be gleaned from a scrappy ponts win over a formerly great fighter who is years past his peak. Nothing at all. I give JC SOME credit for the Hopkins win but let's not forget, Hopkins was 43 years old at the time and had lost 2 of his previous 4. Yes he looked good against a washed up, alcoholic Pavlik in his next fight after JC, big deal.

[Knucklez]

JC fought a line up including:

Branko Sobot
Juan Ferreyra
Rick Thornberry
Omar Sheika
Will Mcintyre
Pocker Tudwill
Mger Mkrtchyan
Kabery Salem
Evans Ashira
Sakio Bika
Peter Manfredo
......is simply the worst line up of any long term "champion" in the history of the sport.

Wrong. Erdei defended against:
Lakatos
Murdoch
Santiago
Blades
Mendoza
Abron
Barashian
The biggest wins he can claim at lt. heavyweight, besides his title-winning effort, were two close hometown decisions vs. Hugo Garay and a win over Euro-level Thomas Ulrich

Wonjongkam defended against:
Asai
Baba
Jesus Martinez
Mangubat
Hussein
Luis Angel Martinez
Kamatsu
Baas
Nakahiro
Everardo Morales
Shimizu
Masuda
and is scheduled to defend against a 14-4 C-level Suriyan Por Chokchai in October.
Before his recent good run of beating Miranda and Kameda, his best win over seven years of being champion the first time was over Naito, whom later outpointed him
Those, my friend, are crappier title fight lineups

Granted, however I don't see anyone claiming Erdei or Wonjongkam should be considered all time greats. But wow, Erdei is undefeated, he must be amazing, right? Let's put him down between Leonard and Ali on the all time list.

Calzaghe's opponents were so limited that some couldn't even pressurise him when he was fighting one handed after fracturing his metacarpels - this is not a sign of Clazaghe's greatness, it's a sign of the weakness of his opposition.

[BoxBuzz]

The fact you call him an overrated bum suggests to me you have little knowledge of boxing. For any fighter to remain unbeaten in 46 fights, making 21 defences of his title over a 10 year period is a hell of an achievement whether you like him or not. Pretty stupid and ignorant statement.

Do you honestly think Ottke, Lucas, Mundine, Siaca or Beyer would have beaten him even if they fought?

All kidding aside, I have to ultimately agree that this was a remarkable achievment. And that he has Hopkins and Jones on his resume is about as compelling a story as there has ever been in boxing. Yes I know they were both washed up....but the record stands.....and Calzaghe owns it...like it or not.

The notion that Calzaghe beating Roy Jones Jr is "as compelling a story as there have ever been in boxing" is prepostorous. Roy was coming off 3 losses in his previous 6 fights, 2 by KO, and was clearly a mile over the hill. There is little credit to be gleaned from a scrappy ponts win over a formerly great fighter who is years past his peak. Nothing at all. I give JC SOME credit for the Hopkins win but let's not forget, Hopkins was 43 years old at the time and had lost 2 of his previous 4. Yes he looked good against a washed up, alcoholic Pavlik in his next fight after JC, big deal.

Let's see how can I couch my subtle nuance in a way that is perhaps more understandable for you.

As compelling a STORY as there has ever been TOLD in boxing. It is a STORY tellers DREAM! Is that more palatable?

I really think JC is better than his worst critics make him out to be, and not quite what that resume would have people assuming in another 10 years. It is quite a resume even if it was timed to perfection.

[Controversial]

"You have very little knowledge of boxing" = the standard retort of someone that can't think of a productive counter argument. Perhaps Current Scene would be more to your liking? The simple fact is that JC fought a load of shite.

For a so called 'boxing fan' to call a 46-0 world champion 'an overrated bum' and a 'load of shite' suggests to me you shouldn't be on any boxing forum.

[elmersalsa]

Joe Calzaghe may be the greatest fighter of the 168 pound division, but, HE COULD NEVER IN MY VIEW, be an all-time top 100 great. C'mon, let's face it, who did he beat in his prime? Nuff said.

[BoxBuzz]

elmer....on the other hand, brilliantly managed.

[Darling]

Knucklez makes some good points.

[giacomino]

JC fought a line up including:

Branko Sobot
Juan Ferreyra
Rick Thornberry
Omar Sheika
Will Mcintyre
Pocker Tudwill
Mger Mkrtchyan
Kabery Salem
Evans Ashira
Sakio Bika
Peter Manfredo
......is simply the worst line up of any long term "champion" in the history of the sport.

Wrong. Erdei defended against:
Lakatos
Murdoch
Santiago
Blades
Mendoza
Abron
Barashian
The biggest wins he can claim at lt. heavyweight, besides his title-winning effort, were two close hometown decisions vs. Hugo Garay and a win over Euro-level Thomas Ulrich

Wonjongkam defended against:
Asai
Baba
Jesus Martinez
Mangubat
Hussein
Luis Angel Martinez
Kamatsu
Baas
Nakahiro
Everardo Morales
Shimizu
Masuda
and is scheduled to defend against a 14-4 C-level Suriyan Por Chokchai in October.
Before his recent good run of beating Miranda and Kameda, his best win over seven years of being champion the first time was over Naito, whom later outpointed him
Those, my friend, are crappier title fight lineups

Granted, however I don't see anyone claiming Erdei or Wonjongkam should be considered all time greats. But wow, Erdei is undefeated, he must be amazing, right? Let's put him down between Leonard and Ali on the all time list.

Calzaghe's opponents were so limited that some couldn't even pressurise him when he was fighting one handed after fracturing his metacarpels - this is not a sign of Clazaghe's greatness, it's a sign of the weakness of his opposition.

I get your point on Joe C, but actually there are people who talk up Wonjongkam like he's an ATG flyweight when in fact, while very skilled, he has mostly fought light-touches throughout his career until the past year or so

[oliverfennell]

Calzaghe was a nice fighter, a HOFer no doubt, but in no way is he an ATG. And please stop citing the Jones win as something special. Jones had been shot for five years when they fought. While their ages weren't all that different, (Jones 39, Joe C 36) Calzaghe was still in the general vicinity of the top of his game. Jones hadn't won a meaningful fight since beating Tarver in 2003 and had lost three of his previous six fights. The Jones fight provided Calzaghe a nice payday against a badly faded legend, but that was about it.
While the Hopkins win was nice in that Calzaghe was able to solve a difficult, albeit very old, puzzle, Calzaghe's best win IMO was Kessler, an undefeated champion at the top of his game who has continued to be one of the best in the division in the three years since the fight

The Kessler win was excellent and I don't think it deserves to be discredited just because Kessler has lost one since, to another very good boxer. I rewatched Calzaghe-Kessler recently and Kessler was formidable that night; would have comfortably beaten anyone else from 160-175.

Hopkins also, age aside, was the top guy in his division and remains very high world class to this day. People can cite his age if they want, but I prefer to go on form, and therefore beating Hopkins was a very solid result for Calzaghe.

Jones, agree with consensus, was just a name and a payday at that point.

[oliverfennell]

I think the "will you be watching in 10 years?" rule applies here: Clazaghe had a great career, a good chin and a good record ... but I will not be re-watching any of his fights except maybe the Lacy match. In contrast, I often re-watch Benn, Eubank, Roy Jones fights.

I think the Benn-Watson-Eubank fights were legendary (and Benn-McClellan, despite the tragic ending was amazing), but Calzaghe never had any defining fights like that.

Whether or not you rewatch someone's fights is hardly a criteria in ranking their ATG status, otherwise Gatti would rank higher than Pernell Whitaker....

I think it's a perfectly good criteria for judging a fighter's greatness. I am not really the kind of person who is interested in all that P4P and ATG nonsense, because the criteria applied are not always in line with the act of watching and enjoying a fight. By reversing your argument, one would have to say that Sven Ottke was a 'greater' boxer than Chris Eubank based on his record and ranking - but give me 1 Eubank fight for 10 Ottke fights any day.

And in his own way, Gatti was a great fighter - sure he lost a few, but he was in some legendary wars and therefore deserves the tag 'warrior greatness'. Gatti had his defining fights with Ward - but Calzaghe never had anything approaching them for pure excitement.

OK, you could indeed say someone was a "great warrior", even if their statistical achievements were not great. But no, I don't think entertainment value is a valid criteria in assessing historical standing. Is Carl Thompson "greater" than Sven Ottke? Hell no! But of course, give me a Thompson fight to watch over an Ottke one every time!

"Defining fights" with Ward? Ward never even won a genuine world title. For sure he was great entertainment, but let's be honest, he was a gatekeeper. You're telling me Calzaghe's wins over Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins were less "defining" than Gatti's over Ward??

As for Eubank, are you forgetting he too was in A LOT of stinkers? (And yes, I would rank Ottke over him in terms of achievements)

[Controversial]

What people are forgetting is both Hopkins and Jones were challenged by JC and both backed out. Hopkins agreed to fight JC in 2002 and then the next day doubled his wage demand from $3million to $6million and the fight fell through. It wasn't like JC was ducking these guys, there were plenty of offers made but a combination of weight differences, refusal to travel, mandatory title defences, wage demands and injuries these fights never came off.

In fact I can remember JC calling all the top Americans out after his fights, I can't remember them calling him out though.

JC was a nightmare opponent. He was a southpaw, was fast, had a very high work rate, a great chin and fought for 3 minutes a round. Not an easy opponent for anyone so I'm not surprised the big names avoided him. A true member of the "who needs him club".

[Carbo]

You cannot call a fighter immensely talented without their having fought decent opposition. Man Utd could spend a season in the Blue Square league and win every game but it would not mark them out as a great team until they did the same in the Prem, or at least the Championship.

JC fought a line up including:

Branko Sobot
Juan Ferreyra
Rick Thornberry
Omar Sheika
Will Mcintyre
Pocker Tudwill
Mger Mkrtchyan
Kabery Salem
Evans Ashira
Sakio Bika
Peter Manfredo
......is simply the worst line up of any long term "champion" in the history of the sport. Even his so called bigger name defenses were bog standard at best - Viet, Woodhall, Brewer , Reid,Mitchell all average fighters who reached world class by their fingertips and in the case of Brewer and Mitchell were over the hill. Plus many people thought Reid beat JC and Brewer had him badly hurt. RJJ and BHop were past prime. Granted BHop put n a good performance against Pavlik in his next fight but Pavlik has turned out to be dogshit plus you're not going to persude me that a 43 year old version of Hopkins is a peak version.


You also said that he fought all that was available - you forget Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, Anthony Mundine, Manny Siaca and Marcus Beyer who were all better than the mob that KC fought none was exactly SRR, JC avoided them like the plague.

Overrated bum, at best.

Of course, Knucklez. Whatever you say, anyone who argues that, at best -- at best -- Calzaghe was an overrated bum, self evidently doesn't know much about boxing, or, more to the point, has absolutely no ability to judge a boxer.

Complain all you want about that assessment, say it's because I don't want to properly counter your arguments, but what's the point in engaging with someone who thinks that Joe Calzaghe was actually an overrated bum?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I'd call him an all time great. Somewhere in the 100-200 range is an acceptable ranking, and that's damn good. Can anyone imagine his name not coming up 50 years from now in a discussion about the greatest Super Middleweights?

Heading into the Lacy fight a lot of us were expecting that the chicken had finally been cornered after all of the cancellations. I don't recall them all, but Johnson was particularly damning with how many times it happened and the fight never occurring.

I think some people just can't or wont get past their initial impressions on him. Stubbornness is a common trait that affects us all in some way.

Hopkins was definitely old, but Calzaghe had him looking for a way out of there. And that was as shocking as Tyson/Douglas.

[earl of queensbury]

Whether or not you rewatch someone's fights is hardly a criteria in ranking their ATG status, otherwise Gatti would rank higher than Pernell Whitaker....

I think it's a perfectly good criteria for judging a fighter's greatness. I am not really the kind of person who is interested in all that P4P and ATG nonsense, because the criteria applied are not always in line with the act of watching and enjoying a fight. By reversing your argument, one would have to say that Sven Ottke was a 'greater' boxer than Chris Eubank based on his record and ranking - but give me 1 Eubank fight for 10 Ottke fights any day.

And in his own way, Gatti was a great fighter - sure he lost a few, but he was in some legendary wars and therefore deserves the tag 'warrior greatness'. Gatti had his defining fights with Ward - but Calzaghe never had anything approaching them for pure excitement.

OK, you could indeed say someone was a "great warrior", even if their statistical achievements were not great. But no, I don't think entertainment value is a valid criteria in assessing historical standing. Is Carl Thompson "greater" than Sven Ottke? Hell no! But of course, give me a Thompson fight to watch over an Ottke one every time!

"Defining fights" with Ward? Ward never even won a genuine world title. For sure he was great entertainment, but let's be honest, he was a gatekeeper. You're telling me Calzaghe's wins over Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins were less "defining" than Gatti's over Ward??

As for Eubank, are you forgetting he too was in A LOT of stinkers? (And yes, I would rank Ottke over him in terms of achievements)

To be honest, I think that the Ward-Gatti trilogy will be discussed years after any of Calzaghe's fights. Does anyone really discuss any of Joe's big fights (Kessler, Lacy, Hopkins, Jones!!) anymore?
On paper, Joe was a great fighter, but I still am not convinced that this translates into greatness in real terms - he wasn't a KO artist, he had an ugly technique, and he never really went into the trenches. For me, Hamed, Lewis, Benn and Eubank all rank above Joe for greatness - I'd put him on a footing with Johnny Nelson.

[earl of queensbury]

Johnny Nelson? Come on, Earl.

Okay, it was a bit of a provocation.

I guess I just never felt any awe when watching a Calzaghe fight. I remember watching Benn-McClellan and my jaw literally dropped when Benn got back into the ring after being knocked out in the first round. It was one of the few times I've ever felt remotely nationalistic.

[earl of queensbury]

Johnny Nelson? Come on, Earl.

Okay, it was a bit of a provocation.

I guess I just never felt any awe when watching a Calzaghe fight. I remember watching Benn-McClellan and my jaw literally dropped when Benn got back into the ring after being knocked out in the first round. It was one of the few times I've ever felt remotely nationalistic.

I cheered that fight in a way I've never cheered any other. I don't think that is a fair barometer to measure Calzaghe's career though, he won every belt at 168, and has wins against Hopkins and Jones, albeit old versions of Hopkins and Jones, but his ability deserves him a mention with the likes of Lewis, Benn, Eubank, Hamed etc. Joe was a talented fighter, he could have stepped up earlier, but Hopkins turned him down in '02, he could have pressed for other fights or moved up but he didn't, we can only judge on what we saw, I would pick him to beat any of the 168 fighters knocking about Britain in 90's, comfortably too.

You're a fair man.

Nonetheless, I think that history will be unkind to Joe in terms of his actual fights, even if he is remembered for his unblemished record.

[oliverfennell]

I think it's a perfectly good criteria for judging a fighter's greatness. I am not really the kind of person who is interested in all that P4P and ATG nonsense, because the criteria applied are not always in line with the act of watching and enjoying a fight. By reversing your argument, one would have to say that Sven Ottke was a 'greater' boxer than Chris Eubank based on his record and ranking - but give me 1 Eubank fight for 10 Ottke fights any day.

And in his own way, Gatti was a great fighter - sure he lost a few, but he was in some legendary wars and therefore deserves the tag 'warrior greatness'. Gatti had his defining fights with Ward - but Calzaghe never had anything approaching them for pure excitement.

OK, you could indeed say someone was a "great warrior", even if their statistical achievements were not great. But no, I don't think entertainment value is a valid criteria in assessing historical standing. Is Carl Thompson "greater" than Sven Ottke? Hell no! But of course, give me a Thompson fight to watch over an Ottke one every time!

"Defining fights" with Ward? Ward never even won a genuine world title. For sure he was great entertainment, but let's be honest, he was a gatekeeper. You're telling me Calzaghe's wins over Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins were less "defining" than Gatti's over Ward??

As for Eubank, are you forgetting he too was in A LOT of stinkers? (And yes, I would rank Ottke over him in terms of achievements)

To be honest, I think that the Ward-Gatti trilogy will be discussed years after any of Calzaghe's fights. Does anyone really discuss any of Joe's big fights (Kessler, Lacy, Hopkins, Jones!!) anymore?
On paper, Joe was a great fighter, but I still am not convinced that this translates into greatness in real terms - he wasn't a KO artist, he had an ugly technique, and he never really went into the trenches. For me, Hamed, Lewis, Benn and Eubank all rank above Joe for greatness - I'd put him on a footing with Johnny Nelson.

I guess we'll just have to disagree with the importance of entertainment value. But let's just say more people will remember Butterbean than Chris Byrd...

To your criticisms: "he wasn't a KO artist" - actually, earlier in his career, he was, but hand damage limited that later. But I guess that doesn't change what you're getting at; that once he reached a certain level, he didn't have those highlight-reel KOs that a lot of greats have.

"Ugly technique" - that's strictly one person's opinion. While I was rarely out of my seat watching him, I also was usually entertained enough. Fast hands, good workrate, aggressive, what's wrong with that package?

"Never went into the trenches" - neither did Roy Jones, and nobody's denying his ATG status because of that. Anyway, I have to disagree. True, there's no Benn-McClellan type fight on his record, but his fights with Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Mitchell and Kessler were all pretty stirring at times.

[Carbo]

OK, you could indeed say someone was a "great warrior", even if their statistical achievements were not great. But no, I don't think entertainment value is a valid criteria in assessing historical standing. Is Carl Thompson "greater" than Sven Ottke? Hell no! But of course, give me a Thompson fight to watch over an Ottke one every time!

"Defining fights" with Ward? Ward never even won a genuine world title. For sure he was great entertainment, but let's be honest, he was a gatekeeper. You're telling me Calzaghe's wins over Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins were less "defining" than Gatti's over Ward??

As for Eubank, are you forgetting he too was in A LOT of stinkers? (And yes, I would rank Ottke over him in terms of achievements)

To be honest, I think that the Ward-Gatti trilogy will be discussed years after any of Calzaghe's fights. Does anyone really discuss any of Joe's big fights (Kessler, Lacy, Hopkins, Jones!!) anymore?
On paper, Joe was a great fighter, but I still am not convinced that this translates into greatness in real terms - he wasn't a KO artist, he had an ugly technique, and he never really went into the trenches. For me, Hamed, Lewis, Benn and Eubank all rank above Joe for greatness - I'd put him on a footing with Johnny Nelson.

I guess we'll just have to disagree with the importance of entertainment value. But let's just say more people will remember Butterbean than Chris Byrd...

To your criticisms: "he wasn't a KO artist" - actually, earlier in his career, he was, but hand damage limited that later. But I guess that doesn't change what you're getting at; that once he reached a certain level, he didn't have those highlight-reel KOs that a lot of greats have.

"Ugly technique" - that's strictly one person's opinion. While I was rarely out of my seat watching him, I also was usually entertained enough. Fast hands, good workrate, aggressive, what's wrong with that package?

"Never went into the trenches" - neither did Roy Jones, and nobody's denying his ATG status because of that. Anyway, I have to disagree. True, there's no Benn-McClellan type fight on his record, but his fights with Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Mitchell and Kessler were all pretty stirring at times.

Got to agree with this.

Calzaghe definitely went into the trenches, as anyone who say his Reid, Brewer and Mitchell fights can attest.

And the Kessler fight was a serious gut check. On the night of that fight, Kessler was the second best fighter in the world below 175, and he looked as if he might beat Calzaghe, who sucked it up, made clever mid-fight adjustments and came roaring back. Indeed, he would have stopped Kessler in the late middle rounds, when he had him seriously hurt to the body, but for the referee egregiously stepping in because of a borderline low blow.

[Ambling Alp]

Calzaghe was a great fighter. I don't know he gets the flack that he does. He have the best competiton to fight, but he beat enough good fighters, most of them handily.

[Crease]

Overrated bum, at best.

That is despicable. My friend let me inform you of two things:

1. Bums do NOT hold a Major World Title for over 10 years.

2. Bums do NOT beat the likes of Hopkins and Jones Jr.