NOW THE DUST HAS SETTLED - CALZAGHE V LACY

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 06 Mar 2006, 16:50

Pundit - your 'sumo wrestling' comment on another thread shoots down your attempts to appear non bitter and non biaised simple as that

Its about respect - if I get it wrong about a fighter (like I have done with hopkins) you hold your hand up

you don't scour your mind looking for ways to put a fighter down cos you dont like him

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 06 Mar 2006, 16:52

Jaime Garza wrote:Surely, if the art of boxing is to hit and not get hit Calzaghe was near pefection. Bearing in mind his age and the injuries he has had I would say that i dont know of a fighter active toady who has ever put in a single performance as good as that. You are only as good as your last fight. For me Calzaghe is no1 pound for pound.

Over Floyd as well? Coming from an ex world champ that's an interesting take. In fact, it's often seemed to me that it's the boxers themselves who have always appreciated JC more than the fans and writers - which says a lot I reckon. Even Hagler had Joe P4P top 6 before sat.

But I agree - hard to think of another performance of that standard recently. Floyd over Gatti I suppose, but that fight was 10-1 odds before the first bell.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 06 Mar 2006, 16:55

KO Artist wrote:
Mattyp151 wrote:
Wrists wrote:Lacy was the most dangerous in his weight class - this is not my opinion but the opinion of the vast majority

I ask again who has Kessler beaten?? - please dont give me Mundine he is not great at all!!

Lacy was not hand picked - he was the media proclaimed 'man' at 168

I accept Hattons win is better - my point was you dont seem to give credit where its due

bet you think Vitali was robbed against Lennox??
Lacy certainly was the most dangerous, but dangerous doesn't equal the best. After Saturday, it is now painfully obvious where he lacks in terms of boxing talents. The vast majority, I'll agree, said he was dangerous, but he obviously was easily neutralized when fought correctly.
Mke your mind up. On 27th Feb you said this about the matchup

"Calzaghe also hasn't fought a fighter as good as Lacy yet either. He suits his style now, but I bet once the first good shot from Jeff catches Joe C., he'll change his tune real quick. I don't think this fight comes too early at all. He's always been a fighter, and won't sit there and take time off when he doesn't need too. Calzaghe has been fighting so-so fighters as of late, not that Lacy is blowing people out of the water with his challenges, but I think Joe is ripe for the picking. He's been on top long enough, and he's already said he's thinking about going to LHW after this fight. That way, he's already setting up an excuse on no rematch, win or lose. He loses, he'll say he was to caught up in the possible weight class change, and he wins, he'll say he already stated he's moving up, so there will be no rematch."

Stop making excuses for Calzaghes brilliance and scour the gyms of the US to find a challenger who belongs in the same ring as JC

For Lacy's sake there better not be a rematch. He deserves to keep his faculties.

How is that a fornicating excuse? Jesus, I think you guys turn anything remotely anti-Calzaghe into sour grapes upon reading. This shit has been happening all day over on the Current Scene.

Guess what? For the 50th time, I was wrong. I've said it 600 fornicating times today that I didn't think Joe had it in him at this point to dominate a fight like he did. I've said Joe fougt a brilliant fight, and Lacy was underprepared and after the fight, it was easy to see what Lacy lacks. Did I know of his weaknesses before? Yes, did I think they were as apparent as they are now? No. I was wrong, oh fornicating well.

I still don't see how I've made up one excuse for Jeff other than Joe is better than him.

Jaime Garza · Post by **Jaime Garza** » 06 Mar 2006, 17:24

MightyWarrior wrote:
Jaime Garza wrote:Surely, if the art of boxing is to hit and not get hit Calzaghe was near pefection. Bearing in mind his age and the injuries he has had I would say that i dont know of a fighter active toady who has ever put in a single performance as good as that. You are only as good as your last fight. For me Calzaghe is no1 pound for pound.
Over Floyd as well? Coming from an ex world champ that's an interesting take. In fact, it's often seemed to me that it's the boxers themselves who have always appreciated JC more than the fans and writers - which says a lot I reckon. Even Hagler had Joe P4P top 6 before sat.

But I agree - hard to think of another performance of that standard recently. Floyd over Gatti I suppose, but that fight was 10-1 odds before the first bell.

Yes Rob, my friend, over Floyd Mayweather as well. I think too few fighters are given credit for staying and dominating in the same division. Calzaghe is doing it, marvin did it and so did guys like Sanchez as well. Guys like Alexis (Arguello) and Duran move through the weights but only after they were very tight at the weight. It seems that nowsadays fighting outside of your natrual division is the rule, not the exception.

I watched it again with my kid last night. His performance was almost perfect. If he had rounded it off with a clean KO it would have been probably the most complete performance I have ever seen. Though Arguello beating Olivares was pretty good too.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 06 Mar 2006, 17:36

Jaime Garza wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:
Jaime Garza wrote:Surely, if the art of boxing is to hit and not get hit Calzaghe was near pefection. Bearing in mind his age and the injuries he has had I would say that i dont know of a fighter active toady who has ever put in a single performance as good as that. You are only as good as your last fight. For me Calzaghe is no1 pound for pound.
Over Floyd as well? Coming from an ex world champ that's an interesting take. In fact, it's often seemed to me that it's the boxers themselves who have always appreciated JC more than the fans and writers - which says a lot I reckon. Even Hagler had Joe P4P top 6 before sat.

But I agree - hard to think of another performance of that standard recently. Floyd over Gatti I suppose, but that fight was 10-1 odds before the first bell.
Yes Rob, my friend, over Floyd Mayweather as well. I think too few fighters are given credit for staying and dominating in the same division. Calzaghe is doing it, marvin did it and so did guys like Sanchez as well. Guys like Alexis (Arguello) and Duran move through the weights but only after they were very tight at the weight. It seems that nowsadays fighting outside of your natrual division is the rule, not the exception.

I watched it again with my kid last night. His performance was almost perfect. If he had rounded it off with a clean KO it would have been probably the most complete performance I have ever seen. Though Arguello beating Olivares was pretty good too.

Basically, by your standards Jaime, Holyfield could come out of retire, fight Adrew Golota, dominate him for 12 rounds, and score a ridiculous KO win near the end of 12, and he'd play into the P4P list because that would be a great perfomance by a guy who has been retired for a while...Good as your last fight doesn't mean a thing if your previous Million or whatever aren't spectacular. Hopkins and Jones weren't unanimous p4p champs for one fight in particular, but certain fights did play into it more than others. I don't think you can put Joe top 5 p4p for beating a 1 dimensional Lacy...just can't see it.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 06 Mar 2006, 18:10

MightyWarrior wrote:Over Floyd as well? Coming from an ex world champ that's an interesting take. In fact, it's often seemed to me that it's the boxers themselves who have always appreciated JC more than the fans and writers - which says a lot I reckon. Even Hagler had Joe P4P top 6 before sat.

Boxers - especially good ones - usually don't even have to think through promotional hype, and can see substance a mile off.

Jaime: it's truly amazing you're posting here - I was just born when you had your world title - but when I first saw your name 'WBC Bantamweight' immediately flashed in my head. Have you ever thought about writing on boxing? You seem preternaturally articulate for a 50+ fight, top flight pro from the 70's/80's West Coast scene.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 06 Mar 2006, 20:08

Jaime Garza wrote: Yes Rob, my friend, over Floyd Mayweather as well. I think too few fighters are given credit for staying and dominating in the same division. Calzaghe is doing it, marvin did it and so did guys like Sanchez as well. Guys like Alexis (Arguello) and Duran move through the weights but only after they were very tight at the weight. It seems that nowsadays fighting outside of your natrual division is the rule, not the exception.

I watched it again with my kid last night. His performance was almost perfect. If he had rounded it off with a clean KO it would have been probably the most complete performance I have ever seen. Though Arguello beating Olivares was pretty good too.

Yep you're not wrong there Jaime. These days a boxer wins a world title, then you turn around a minute later, and he's gone: moved up a division or two. It's impossible to keep track most of the time, even for the real fans.

It's hard to think of another great champ like Hagler, who actualy stayed at his weight and saw off all comers - any other recent examples? I can't think of too many.....Joe suffers because of the bizzare WBO ratings - throwing him in in with fighters who didn't belong in his league.

Fantastic to see JC come of age this weekend. But at the same time, I'm sad it's taken so long, and wonder how many great nights he could have had if he'd been matched a little better a few years back.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 06 Mar 2006, 20:09

Manos de Oro wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:Over Floyd as well? Coming from an ex world champ that's an interesting take. In fact, it's often seemed to me that it's the boxers themselves who have always appreciated JC more than the fans and writers - which says a lot I reckon. Even Hagler had Joe P4P top 6 before sat.
Boxers - especially good ones - usually don't even have to think through promotional hype, and can see substance a mile off.

Jaime: it's truly amazing you're posting here - I was just born when you had your world title - but when I first saw your name 'WBC Bantamweight' immediately flashed in my head. Have you ever thought about writing on boxing? You seem preternaturally articulate for a 50+ fight, top flight pro from the 70's/80's West Coast scene.

Good call bud

Axe · Post by **Axe** » 06 Mar 2006, 21:51

Wrists wrote:I have deliberately waited for a couple of days before writing this as I have been on a high and wanted my ramblings to be rational rather than the up a height version I would have given yesterday

People on here will know I am a Calzaghe believer and I have had good crack with the likes of J and jamesmc about the virutes of Joe etc etc etc

I know hindsight is great but I always believed Calzaghe was too good for Lacy and I am glad I was right.

I think sometimes people's dislike or frustration with a fighter sometimes makes them overlook their skills as a fighter - I think many on here have been guilty of that with Joe.

I made a concious effort to look at this fight totally impartially and every time I came up with the same conclusion - Joe wins every time.

I asked the question how does Lacy beat Joe?? - Many on here said Joe was a faded fighter - on the back of what?? Many say the 2nd Veit fight was proof that Joe was on the slide, to me this was borne of frustration that Joe was fighting a guy he had beaten rather than a rational view of the fight.

People said that if Salem could knock Joe down and Mitchell the same then Lacy would KO him - again on what basis, Lacy's record is built up of knockouts against fighters 1 even 2 levels down from anyone Calzaghe had fought, a win over a shot Robin Reid does not legend make yet people reacted that this was the second coming of Tyson.

Joe (and I know hindsight is great) had the proven chin, proven boxing skills had beaten better fighters and had the experience and home advantage (although joes beats Lacy anywhere)

I could see no other outcome

Some of the stuff written about Joe has been shameful and I am so glad he rammed a lot of critics rubbish down there throats (I only mean about 0.5% of people on here when i say that)

Joe was nothing short of SENSATIONAL and I now hope he gets the crdit he deserves as apart from PBF, Winky and maybe Barrera Joe is the next best fighter in the sport.

In my mind the only guy (and if people read old threads they will see I have always said this) who stands a chance against Calzaghe is Tarver and I would make Joe the favourite right now.

Thanks Joe - brilliant fight, brilliant fighter

Cheers

Wrists

PS. Intelligent comments only please lol!!

Joe certainly deserves a lot of credit and I commend him on the win, but when you say the only one who could beat him is Tarver, I take exception. There are many lightheavies who could take Joe out, Paul Briggs being one of them, Tomasz Adamek being another.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Mar 2006, 21:56

Jaime, welcome to the site and to the British forum. As has been mentioned some very articulate post on this thread.

I have to say I cannot remember you in action - little, infact probably no, coverage of yourself in the UK. I was also too young to be reading about US boxing during the time. I did remember reading snippets about you in boxing magazines in the mid 90's (when I started getting magazines) - so your name was familar when I read this thread.

Onto the point in hand, I do think we all maybe guilty of going a little overboard here. I mean, Mighty W blaming the WBO for Joe's lack of opponents is taking it too the extreme. Technically of course you are right the WBO did introduce some obscure mandatories - but since when has an all time great fighter just simply obided by the laws of their sanctioning body. Bernard Hopkins is quite possibly the only fighter in recent times to strickly stick to the by laws and he too was in his mid/late 30's before he achieved all time great status.

Completely different in 80's etc, there were less championships available and seemed to be less silly rulings. Hagler seemed to be able to fight the very best in the devision without the threat of being stripped for failing to fight a mandatory. This luxury doesn't exist anymore since the advent of interim champions but when you become a champion you will remain that champion untill you move up or lose - the title itself becomes meaningless, as Marco Antonio Barrera has proven and Antonio Tarver is proving.

Plenty of champions have said "no thanks" to obscure Mandatories and looked for the bigger fish, so for me despite finally stepping it up last weekend - the fault of the last 8 years lies firmly with team Calzaghe.

As for the debate on which performance was more impressive Gatti vs Mayweather or Calzaghe vs Lacy, well I think the suggestion that because Mayweather is the bigger favourite it must be Joes' is flawed. Mayweather was a huge favourite because it was Floyd Mayweather, not because Gatti was a worst opponent than Lacy. Gatti is a two, probably soon to be three, time world champion with names likes Reulas, Leija, Millet, Ward, Harris Patterson, Gamache and Leonard Dorin on his resume. Lacy doesn't have that history or that record. Has Lacy fought a top ten guy? Robin Reid and Scott Pemberton were maybe but Reid was inactive and Pemberton is a shot fight as Peter Manfredo has just proven. Gatti's resume is not great for a two time world champion, but Reulas, Leija, Ward, Harris Patterson, Millett, and possibly Dorrin and Damgaard were top ten fighters at the time of their bout.

The fact that he was such a big priced underdog is due to Mayweather's past accomplishments, the reason Lacy started (I think) as betting favourite was indicitative to Joe's achieviements.

Performance to performance though, they were similar - both systematic beatings in which the opponent was made to look clueless and outclassed.

However, I would like to mention Trinidad vs Wright in the debate - that was another systematic beating in a supposed 50:50 superfight.

Foggy · Post by **Foggy** » 07 Mar 2006, 08:33

Wrists wrote:Why can't people gave credit where its due!!

80% of boxing people picked LACY and Joe spanked the granny out of him

yet people again will not gave the man credit

who has Kessler beaten??

Joe is done at 168 simple as

let me guess?? - Bet you thought Hatton 'hugged' his way to victory against Tsyzu??

Pundit & MattyP are yanks mate & are having ago at Joe beacuse he just kick the shite out of America's big hope, abit of sour grapes being shown by both, Wrists so long as you believe in Joes's abilities thats what should count, so just ignore them yanks

dumdane · Post by **dumdane** » 07 Mar 2006, 11:27

Wrists wrote:You can argue all you want - Lacy WAS NOT handpicked he was the best fight out there at the weight and Joe sapnked him end off

give credit where its due instead of sounding bitter cos a non american put on a masterclass

if that was winky or PBF you would be on here barely able to contain yourself

Lacy was the best fight out there in terms of money.
In terms of accomplishments Lacy's resume was no better than Kessler's
In that sence you can say Calzaghe picked the most lucrative opponent.

Kessler simply hasn't got the flaws tha made Lacy look so hopelessly misplaced against Calzaghe. So in terms of style you can certainly argue that Joe picked the easier opponent.

When you say Lacy was the best fight out there - It REALLY depends on what grounds you define "the best fight". But sure enough - it was the best for Calzaghe.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 07 Mar 2006, 12:03

Foggy wrote:
Wrists wrote:Why can't people gave credit where its due!!

80% of boxing people picked LACY and Joe spanked the granny out of him

yet people again will not gave the man credit

who has Kessler beaten??

Joe is done at 168 simple as

let me guess?? - Bet you thought Hatton 'hugged' his way to victory against Tsyzu??
Pundit & MattyP are yanks mate & are having ago at Joe beacuse he just kick the shite out of America's big hope, abit of sour grapes being shown by both, Wrists so long as you believe in Joes's abilities thats what should count, so just ignore them yanks

Yes, another cluelss Brit (no, not all of you, just a few) that comes out of nowhere to open his mouth...

Show me where I haven't given Joe credit. Seriously. Yes, I felt Lacy would win. I've admitted 150 fornicating time I was wrong, and I have been more than surprised by how much better Joe was the other night than I had seen in any of his other fights.

Have I questioned Joe's ability? No, he rightfully kicked the shit out of a fighter thought to be the next great champ at Super Mid. I admitted before hand Lacy had certain issues that made me worry, but I also stated I didn't think they would be such a factor in the fight. Well, in turn they were. And also in turn, it has become evident that many people, myself included, overrated Lacy and he is truly more one dimensional than basically anyone could've imagined. So, hooray to everyone who said Joe would win, but did anyone predict that Joe would win by 14 points in a total whitewash of a UD...I'd be willing to say not many.

So, next time you make a comment about a "yank" and "sour grapes", you may want to pick one who is actually bitching and moaning about Lacy losing, and not one that just wants to see the best fight possbile at 168.

I don't see why wanting Joe to finish what he started 9 years ago is such a big deal. He said it his fornicating self in an interview after the fight.

As for Calzaghe P4P, not quite. You don't beat someone who isn't even the top ten and shoot up to #1. Doesn't work that way, especially with a fighter of Jeff's nature.

So, please, inform me of my sour grapes, because I've given Joe tons of credit for handling Lacy the way he did. The fact that Lacy was overrated coming in and more one dimensional than anyone thought should be more than common knowledge by now.

Foggy · Post by **Foggy** » 07 Mar 2006, 14:23

Mattyp151 wrote:
Foggy wrote:
Wrists wrote:Why can't people gave credit where its due!!

80% of boxing people picked LACY and Joe spanked the granny out of him

yet people again will not gave the man credit

who has Kessler beaten??

Joe is done at 168 simple as

let me guess?? - Bet you thought Hatton 'hugged' his way to victory with against Tsyzu??
Pundit & MattyP are yanks mate & are having ago at Joe beacuse he just kick the shite out of America's big hope, abit of sour grapes being shown by both, Wrists so long as you believe in Joes's abilities thats what should count, so just ignore them yanks
Yes, another cluelss Brit (no, not all of you, just a few) that comes out of nowhere to open his mouth...

Bloody hell no need to bite so hard mate.

MTG · Post by **MTG** » 07 Mar 2006, 14:34

M.T GILLICK

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 07 Mar 2006, 20:31

pundit wrote:
Wrists wrote:P - bit harsh to say hand selected

Lacy was the best available and I agree was over hyped but was the best fighter available to Joe
The best available was Kessler.

Lacy was the one beltholder available whose style was taylor-made for JC. Which is why Warren selected him.

should move up to 175 nothing to prove at 168 now
Everything still to prove at 168. But JC will move to 175 to avoid Kessler.

P

Calzaghe would beat Kessler's ass.

Not as easy as Lacy maybe but he'd still win.

Warren didn't select Lacy.

It was Lacy who wanted the fight as Calzaghe was and is the biggest talent and name in the Super Middleweight division so they made it happen. He wasn't hand picked.

If Kessler wants it then do what Lacy did and make some noise and then he can come over here to lose his WBA belt.

Kessler wasn't availible as he'd rather fight a washed up Eric Lucas.

I disagree Foggy, Mattyp has been giving alot of credit.

Pundit just seems to think anyone Joe might fight is hand picked.

maxx · Post by **maxx** » 07 Mar 2006, 21:05

Kessler has fought mostly in Denmark and i see a lot of similaritys with JC in the fact of he's a bit of a homer with not very many big scalps on his belt. Joe should Fight this guy once and for all beat the living daylights out of him and move up to Light-Heavy for the big pay days. Only then will people recognize that JC has been pfp top ten for quite some time and eat their words.

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 08 Mar 2006, 04:29

Didn't want this to turn into UK v USA that was not my intention.

Pundit - my views have nothing to do with your nationality, you could be a space cadet for all I care I would still think your talking rubbish

Thats life we agree to disagree and move on

Foggy · Post by **Foggy** » 08 Mar 2006, 05:46

I still think JC should move up to light Heavy, i understand that people want to see JC & Kessler but its one of them scenario's where if JC beats Kessler another guy will come along at SuperMiddle and people will say now JC has to beat them i.e. A prime exmaple would be if JC beats Kessler then people will want Calzaghe to fight the winner of Green-Mundine. The way i see it is that JC beat the other main guy in the division Lacy & should now move up & have his big fights with Woods, Tarver & Johnson.

jeej · Post by **jeej** » 08 Mar 2006, 06:46

Regardless of what everyone thinks Joe should do, he'll just fight whoever is offering the most money now, and I dont blame him.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 08 Mar 2006, 08:19

But hasn't Calzaghe ALREADY earned plenty of money? It's his legacy which has been in question, not his financial security. I know the money is what fighters are in it for, but Calzaghe could earn a fortune to fight Kessler in Wales after that performance, and showtime would almost certainly show it. I don't believe Calzaghe needs a big name opponent in order to fill an arena, or get the attention of showtime.

Kessler isn't a bit name, but he's one of the last two pieces in the SM jigsaw puzzle, and would give much more credibility to Calzaghes legacy than a fight with Jones Jr. It sickens me very slightly how everyone wants to fight the shell of Jones right now.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 08 Mar 2006, 08:21

MightyWarrior wrote:
Yep you're not wrong there Jaime. These days a boxer wins a world title, then you turn around a minute later, and he's gone: moved up a division or two. It's impossible to keep track most of the time, even for the real fans.

It's hard to think of another great champ like Hagler, who actualy stayed at his weight and saw off all comers - any other recent examples? I can't think of too many.....Joe suffers because of the bizzare WBO ratings - throwing him in in with fighters who didn't belong in his league.

Fantastic to see JC come of age this weekend. But at the same time, I'm sad it's taken so long, and wonder how many great nights he could have had if he'd been matched a little better a few years back.

I’ve often lamented this perceived need to move up in weight to boldly go where no man has gone before etc……

Hamed used to get a lot of stick for not moving up, I really couldn’t see what the fuss was about, he was a 5ft nothing midget and people were clamouring for him to move up in weight? Why not try to become a legend at your natural weight?

I think it’s a shame because some fighters won’t be remembered as a truly great fighter at any particular weight when they perhaps could have. Someone like De La Hoya for example had he stuck around at Junior-Welter or Trinidad at Welter. Maybe Tito is a bad example, making Welter was killing him by all accounts, but you get my drift.

Ray Leonard and Tommy Hearns are to blame of course….

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 08 Mar 2006, 08:25

jamesmcdonnell wrote:It sickens me very slightly how everyone wants to fight the shell of Jones right now.

for starters, jones needs to win a bloody fight first i reckon. 3 losses in a row and he could be in line to fight for the world title at 168.

kessler makes perfect sense and virtually clears the division up. then he can go up to 175 in the knowledge that 168 has been fully dealt with.

i'm ignoring markus beyer cos he doesn't matter does he.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 08 Mar 2006, 08:32

In answer to the thread title which was about Calzaghe, and yes a few days after the event I still feel it was a stunning performance.

It wasn’t that he won, Lacy was a betting favourite but a close one. Had Joe won a scrappy decision, even scored a keenly contested stoppage many would have roundly applauded him but not been massively shocked.

It was the sheer quality of the performance that stands out for me. Joe did things in there that made me go ‘wow, now that takes some skill’ and I haven’t really felt like that since watching a few of Mayweather’s best performances.

I think time will tell the true quality of the performance because Lacy may have been simply exposed on Saturday night, it’s hard to say. If Lacy goes on to lose his next few big fights convincingly whilst Joe plods to a couple more poor points wins then in a way it’s back to square one. Yes the Lacy win was a great event but historically Joe just looked good in with a plodder.

If Lacy looks impressive in years to come then obviously this casts Joe’s display in a far more impressive light.

Was it a true master of his trade soundly thrashing a premier level come forward fighter a la Hopkins-Trinidad?

Or was it the exposure of an over-rated limited fighter a la Lennox Lewis-Grant?

Time will tell….

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 08 Mar 2006, 08:39

Problem is goz, that fight may have ruined Lacy, so we may never know what would have happened had he never fought Calzaghe. Bit like Vargas getting whipped by Trinidad.

NOW THE DUST HAS SETTLED - CALZAGHE V LACY

Re: NOW THE DUST HAS SETTLED - CALZAGHE V LACY