Calzaghe is better than Hatton - MUST READ

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 09 Sep 2005, 04:49

The bottom line for me is, Calzaghe is now biting turbo sour grapes. After basically seeing the British #1 title move from him to Hatton - which has come after Hatton has done what Calzaghe has failed to do for years - get and win a defining fight.

Even Calzaghe's granny couldn't argue that at least one of the fights that's been proposed in the past - Hopkins, Woods, Johnson etc etc - could not have been made if he really wanted it.

And even if Calzaghe fights and beats Lacy that in all honesty is not good enough for a fighter of Calzaghe's talent - as NickD has said, yes of course Lacy is good, but he's only had 20 fights and been champ for a year. If Calzaghe wants to top the division he should be taking on Lacy, then Kessler, then...

If any of the above is wrong, well it is my perception of events. And if this perception from a one time fan is repeated by others, then it's surely proof that Calzaghe's fast losing the plot.

And you can't sue me for an opinion Frank. And if you do, I'll tear up the papers.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 04:52

I just don't get what it is that people think Calzaghe owes them. So his big fights are few and far between, why get so bitter about it? Is it your arse on the line?

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 09 Sep 2005, 04:54

I can be very patriotic but it isn't blind. Every time Joe opens his mouth it annoys me, going on about how great he, p4p number 1 whatever, disrespecting other fighters who have a lot bigger ball and have achieved far more in their careers then he has. How can you respect a guy who has been fooling the public that he is involved in top level world title fights against the like of Pudwill, Salem, Veit, Jimenez, McIntyre, Mktchwhatever etc.

Lacy may come into the ring to "born in the USA' but apart from that I like him. He's willing to fight the best no matter where it takes him, has a very exciting style and he can do it all and still give respect to others that deserve it.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 09 Sep 2005, 04:58

Kilburn wrote:I just don't get what it is that people think Calzaghe owes them. So his big fights are few and far between, why get so bitter about it? Is it your arse on the line?

If you're talking to me, I wouldn't say I'm bitter about it, just sad and frustrated that a fighter of Calzaghe's talent hasn't achieved (or what's even worse, alledgedly tried properly to achieve) what he's capable of

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:01

So what, give him a break - he's just taking the side of his promoter and showing some loyalty, unlike Hatton.

Says he's better than Hatton? Well it's natural a world champion is going to think like that, and fact is, he's probably right.

Great win by Hatton over Tszyu, but up till then, it was bum of the month - overall, Joe has beaten better fighters than Hatton has.

No doubt it hurts his pride to see Hatton drawing 25,000 for beating a succesion of bums - now Ricky has bolted, he's allowed to say it....

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:02

Kilburn wrote:I just don't get what it is that people think Calzaghe owes them. So his big fights are few and far between, why get so bitter about it? Is it your arse on the line?

He doesn't owe me anything, its just frustrating when all you hear from the guys mouth is talk of being the best and how he's undefeated and general self promotion when the reality is he's beaten a handful of decent fighters but on the whole he's fought tomato cans. And why does he feel the need to slag off other fighters? Fighters who've blatantly got more balls than he has.

It's a sad state of affairs when a load of UK boxing fans have turned against one of their own. But he has brought it on himself.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:03

Lenny have you suddenly forgotten all about Ricky Hattons sickeningly bogus WBU reign that lasted years? Designed to fool as many people as possible while raking it in at the same time? Finally he had his big fight and he won, great for him.

So now Calzaghe has his big fight. Lacy might not have the pedigree or standing that Tszyu had, but he's every bit as much a physical threat to Calzaghe as Tszyu was to Hatton. This time it's our guy considered on the way down with the opponent at his strongest. How is Calzaghe not showing balls by taking this fight?

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:05

He'll have shown balls when he's in the ring opposite Lacy. How many fights has he talked about before that haven't happened?

Let's see him through Saturday injury free first and contract signed for November then I will believe some more. But with him nothing is certain until they're in the ring together.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:11

End of the day genuine world champions don't settle for the WBO - remember Calzaghe himself is on record in an old issue of BM (before Eubank) as basically reiterating all the criticism of the belt/body we see day in day out on this forum.

The WBO is a 2nd tier 'world' title, designed to con the public into believing they're watching top-of-the-tree action, when the huge majority of the time they are not.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:18

MightyWarrior wrote:So what, give him a break - he's just taking the side of his promoter and showing some loyalty, unlike Hatton.

Says he's better than Hatton? Well it's natural a world champion is going to think like that, and fact is, he's probably right.

Great win by Hatton over Tszyu, but up till then, it was bum of the month - overall, Joe has beaten better fighters than Hatton has.

No doubt it hurts his pride to see Hatton drawing 25,000 for beating a succesion of bums - now Ricky has bolted, he's allowed to say it....

It's in poor taste I think personally, makes Joe look sour.

Fact is, Ricky did something Joe never did, beat the man to become the man. Yes overall he has a better resume than Ricky, but he's also been pro quite a bit longer, and Ricky has a good 2-3 years of his peak left yet.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:22

Manos de Oro wrote:End of the day genuine world champions don't settle for the WBO - remember Calzaghe himself is on record in an old issue of BM (before Eubank) as basically reiterating all the criticism of the belt/body we see day in day out on this forum.

The WBO is a 2nd tier 'world' title, designed to con the public into believing they're watching top-of-the-tree action, when the huge majority of the time they are not.

Mate if you're still busy rating guys according to whether they've got a WBO belt or one of the "big 3" then I'm afraid you're going to get left behind.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:29

Kilburn wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote:End of the day genuine world champions don't settle for the WBO - remember Calzaghe himself is on record in an old issue of BM (before Eubank) as basically reiterating all the criticism of the belt/body we see day in day out on this forum.

The WBO is a 2nd tier 'world' title, designed to con the public into believing they're watching top-of-the-tree action, when the huge majority of the time they are not.
Mate if you're still busy rating guys according to whether they've got a WBO belt or one of the "big 3" then I'm afraid you're going to get left behind.

I've got loads of posts in this account making the same point - belts are just arbitrary bits of leather these days, of course there's been plenty of stinkers week in week out with the WBC/IBF/WBA. It is pure naivety to judge the worth of someone's reign just because of the strap they hold.

But history has shown those three belts have forced better mandatories on their 'champions' than the WBO... and that means better quality opposition, which means a higher quality reign if the guy keeps winning... and fighters are judged by anyone with a smidgeon of boxing knowledge on who they beat.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:31

I haven't forgotten, but with Ricky he never claimed to be the best in the division till he beat the best in the division, something Calzaghe has yet to achieve. Ricky is also a lot younger than Calzaghe and although these fights were being made everyone believed he seriously did want to take on the best, an accusation I have never heard directed at Joe.

Ok, Ricky is in a stronger division and was lucky enough to have a champ coming towards the end of his career who was willing to fight in his backyard, but Joe's lack of luck doesn't make what he has done in the last 3 years any better.

Great if the Lacy fight comes off, it would be funny to see him fall at the last hurdle before it but great if the fight comes off all the same. But I certainly won't be cheering on Calzaghe if it does because he's British

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:33

The WBO ranking are far inferior to the IBF/WBA/WBC nobody can convince me any different. Would Mkrtchan ever get to a mandatory position with IBF/WBA/WBC? Never. He would never even make their top 15.

Ashira has sneaked into their latest ratings at number 10!

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:34

The belts are all different depending on their division. The fact that the WBO had a fighter as poor as Freeman Barr and their mandatory for so long without forcing a fight was a disgrace and the fact the belt has stopped him getting a ranking with other organisations and forcing a fight with the other holders has surely held him back, but yes made him a rich man.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:36

Manos de Oro wrote: I've got loads of posts in this account making the same point - belts are just arbitrary bits of leather these days, of course there's been plenty of stinkers week in week out with the WBC/IBF/WBA. It is pure naivety to judge the worth of someone's reign just because of the strap they hold.

But history has shown those three belts have forced better mandatories on their 'champions' than the WBO... and that means better quality opposition, which means a higher quality reign if the guy keeps winning... and fighters are judged by anyone with a smidgeon of boxing knowledge on who they beat.

I disagree. These days more and more big fights are being made without a title, and many of these better mandatories you speak of have been and continue to be nothing short of abysmal.

You only have to look as far as Ricky Hatton to see the sub standard opposition an IBF champ can be made to accomodate.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:37

I disagree, in terms of their rankings, the WBO stink, and they allow their favoured champs to fight absolute pigeons as mandatories.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:45

Kilburn wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote: I've got loads of posts in this account making the same point - belts are just arbitrary bits of leather these days, of course there's been plenty of stinkers week in week out with the WBC/IBF/WBA. It is pure naivety to judge the worth of someone's reign just because of the strap they hold.

But history has shown those three belts have forced better mandatories on their 'champions' than the WBO... and that means better quality opposition, which means a higher quality reign if the guy keeps winning... and fighters are judged by anyone with a smidgeon of boxing knowledge on who they beat.
I disagree. These days more and more big fights are being made without a title, and many of these better mandatories you speak of have been and continue to be nothing short of abysmal.

You only have to look as far as Ricky Hatton to see the sub standard opposition an IBF champ can be made to accomodate.

Fair enough, mate. Personally I would rather be rid of them ALL by the end of this weekend but it looks like they're just going to multiply (like a bad virus), so it's worth some time to try and differentiate at least a little, IMO.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 05:48

Manos de Oro wrote:Fair enough, mate. Personally I would rather be rid of them ALL by the end of this weekend but it looks like they're just going to multiply (like a bad virus), so it's worth some time to try and differentiate at least a little, IMO.

Well it certainly seems that Sky TV have ditched the fake titles which comes as a huge relief. Again the schedule for the coming weeks has no bogus belt in sight. Finally they've got someone there who knows what they're doing.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 09 Sep 2005, 06:05

Max Molyneux wrote:I hope Calzaghe fights Lacy after this guy though it's a fight worthy for ITV since Hattons not with SN anymore.

Lacy seems very ordinary to me but I still wouldn't bet against Joe finding a way to avoid fighting him.

BunglesFingers · Post by **BunglesFingers** » 09 Sep 2005, 06:26

JC always starts talking shite when he's got a fight coming up, it's all done to drum up some publicity because otherwise most of the country wouldn't even know that he was fighting.
The fact that he is fighting someone that your casual boxing fan will never have heard of won't exactly help to sell tickets for this one. Joe's so predictable and that is why so many of us expect him to pull out of the Lacy fight with some lame excuse.

I always used to look forward to Calzaghe fights up until a year or two ago but have completely lost interest in him now. I can see myself nodding off on his fight night before the bell rings or going to the pub and forgetting all about it.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 09 Sep 2005, 07:25

Calzaghe's right, Hatton should let the IBF strip him, sit on his wbu title for a decade and fight casino doormen, talk about how he's the man because he's undefeated and never make any of the fights people want to see because the opponents 'aren't as good as him'.
Then he'd be as good as Calzaghe.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 09 Sep 2005, 08:19

stujones wrote:Moan Moan Moan,

Shut up Joe, you haven't fought anyone fit to tie even an aging Kostya Tszyu's boots and I'm afraid that includes Eubank.

Quite odd how he disrespects Hatton for beating an aging champion. Calzaghe beat and ageing FORMER champion to win this belt.

I've "defended" this belt for 8 years.

Yes, and Lester Jacobs retired an undefeated world champion too.... does mean those defences were worthy of being called defences.

Things like this really get me goat up.

Old Eubank is as good if not better than Tyuzu imo, Tyuzus very good but overated. Eubanks best wins easily compare to Tyuzus best wins I'd say. And Eubank could come back from adversity - Tyuzu has had real adversity twice and been taken out twice

Joe is actually right in fairness, he has stayed on top for 8years. If Hatton fights top competition then I'd agree hes gone father than Joe but hes fighting Carlos Maussa next, whos as bad as the poor defenses Joe makes.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 09 Sep 2005, 08:21

Wait until Nick reads this P-N, I think you're about to get slated... 8)

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 09 Sep 2005, 08:24

Old weight drained Eubank the same as Tszyu? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on here bar none. No offence. 8)