Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Question

Overrated
41
16%
Underrated
80
32%
Neither
130
52%
 
Total votes: 251

Ruthless-RKO
Welterweight
Posts: 100689
Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Ruthless-RKO »

polecateddy wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 08:04 Callum Smith seems a poor example to raise in that his career appears pretty much over at this point and at best he will be a footnote in British super-middle history.

In terms of Calzaghe’s record, other than a peak Jones (who would have outpointed Joe), he didn’t miss much. It’s a bit of a reach to suggest Harry Simon, who was really only effective as a light-middle and had a lot of lifestyle issues. He beat a fair version of Hopkins even without sparring and chronic hands. Beyer, Ottke …geez, come on!
No, it's a perfect example. We're saying his career is 'pretty much over', why? cus he lost?

Had he continued winning and beating mandatories and or cans, he'd still be world champion.

Was there a 'Canelo' in Joe Calzaghe's era? Okay, maybe not to the extent where he can make you $5m to $10m..
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by polecateddy »

Ruthless-RKO wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 08:55
polecateddy wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 08:04 Callum Smith seems a poor example to raise in that his career appears pretty much over at this point and at best he will be a footnote in British super-middle history.

In terms of Calzaghe’s record, other than a peak Jones (who would have outpointed Joe), he didn’t miss much. It’s a bit of a reach to suggest Harry Simon, who was really only effective as a light-middle and had a lot of lifestyle issues. He beat a fair version of Hopkins even without sparring and chronic hands. Beyer, Ottke …geez, come on!
No, it's a perfect example. We're saying his career is 'pretty much over', why? cus he lost?

Had he continued winning and beating mandatories and or cans, he'd still be world champion.

Was there a 'Canelo' in Joe Calzaghe's era? Okay, maybe not to the extent where he can make you $5m to $10m..
Peak Roy Jones was obviously the big talent of Joe's era. He'd beat everyone, including Canelo, like a drum frankly! But Joe is very clearly the second best super-middle of all-time. The super-middles of this British era seem thin on talent. I'm not buying at all Callum Smith would have beaten half the fighters on Joe's record. Likewise the godawful BJS.
Dioufy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7351
Joined: 16 Sep 2006, 23:09

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Dioufy »

It was Jones’ forearm that put Jones over.
Not relevant to this but just a fact that a lot of people forget.
rob h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 609
Joined: 15 Dec 2006, 08:36

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by rob h »

Still haven't forgiven him for the Tocker Pudwill nonsense.
tigermoth87
Welterweight
Posts: 1791
Joined: 21 Feb 2016, 11:23

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by tigermoth87 »

polecateddy wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 19:05
Ruthless-RKO wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 08:55
polecateddy wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 08:04 Callum Smith seems a poor example to raise in that his career appears pretty much over at this point and at best he will be a footnote in British super-middle history.

In terms of Calzaghe’s record, other than a peak Jones (who would have outpointed Joe), he didn’t miss much. It’s a bit of a reach to suggest Harry Simon, who was really only effective as a light-middle and had a lot of lifestyle issues. He beat a fair version of Hopkins even without sparring and chronic hands. Beyer, Ottke …geez, come on!
No, it's a perfect example. We're saying his career is 'pretty much over', why? cus he lost?

Had he continued winning and beating mandatories and or cans, he'd still be world champion.

Was there a 'Canelo' in Joe Calzaghe's era? Okay, maybe not to the extent where he can make you $5m to $10m..
Peak Roy Jones was obviously the big talent of Joe's era. He'd beat everyone, including Canelo, like a drum frankly!
No he wouldn't. Roy Jones was exposed as a fraud with a glass jaw who had to juice himself up to win and who loved a good duck.
rob h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 609
Joined: 15 Dec 2006, 08:36

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by rob h »

You'd be hard pressed to find top level fighters that haven't dabbled. Jones was unquestionably one of the best to lace them up.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by polecateddy »

rob h wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 02:44 You'd be hard pressed to find top level fighters that haven't dabbled. Jones was unquestionably one of the best to lace them up.
Yes the bulk up to heavyweight and subsequent big cut back to light-heavy seemed to ruin him unfortunately. You’re quite right of course, most top line boxers, especially those based in America are on very sophisticated doping regimes. Canelo got pinged of course for Clenbuterol. Common usage being as a potent fat burner in weight cutting. But of course it was just the meat!
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27448
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by stujones »

I was in contact at the time (quite regular) with a New York lawyer who also worked in boxing in. The name ashamedly escapes me, but he was heavily involved with Derrick Gainer who, remember at the time, was calling out Hamed all the time. Gainer off course was also part of the RJJ team.

However, he always used to say that he believed based on RJJ training that it was his intention to stay at heavyweight. Originally it wasnt, then it was and actually behind the scenes Roy was bulking up even more trying to negotiate a deal. Basically no deal happened and Roy went back down. So in reality Roy was probably even bigger when he decided to cut
jimmystone
Bantamweight
Posts: 1597
Joined: 01 Dec 2021, 07:31

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by jimmystone »

stujones wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 14:55 I was in contact at the time (quite regular) with a New York lawyer who also worked in boxing in. The name ashamedly escapes me, but he was heavily involved with Derrick Gainer who, remember at the time, was calling out Hamed all the time. Gainer off course was also part of the RJJ team.

However, he always used to say that he believed based on RJJ training that it was his intention to stay at heavyweight. Originally it wasnt, then it was and actually behind the scenes Roy was bulking up even more trying to negotiate a deal. Basically no deal happened and Roy went back down. So in reality Roy was probably even bigger when he decided to cut
Kurt Emhoff?
Wales
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7853
Joined: 23 Mar 2004, 14:05

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Wales »

Billy Tully wrote: 25 Mar 2022, 04:49
Wales wrote: 24 Mar 2022, 22:48 Disagree about RJJ

Calzaghe won his first world title in 1997 at 168
Jones Jnr moved to 175lbs a year earlier

In 2002 calzaghe was fighting Tucker Pudwill , 2 months earlier Jones had announced he was moving to heavyweight to fight Ruiz.
Jones was never the same when he came back down and lost 3 of his next 4 . Arguably lost all 4 as the win in the first contest against Tarver was incredibly debatable .

I still maintain one of Hopkins best performances was against Pavlik in the fight after Joe


Ottke fight should’ve happened . Joe would’ve won I reckon but still should’ve happened
Jones in 2001 was offering to come DOWN to super middle to fight Joe. Joe still wasn't interested.

Collins priced himself out of a fight with Jones, Eubank and Benn were petrified of him. People forget how intimidated fighters were of Jones in his day.
Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
coneye
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8565
Joined: 21 Jun 2004, 06:00

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by coneye »

Lots of real good fighters around in that era ,, But a Prime RJJ was jsut that step above them all ,,, his later legacy sort of ruined his rep same with James Toney , he just like Jones went on to long ,,
Wales
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7853
Joined: 23 Mar 2004, 14:05

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Wales »

Had he retired after the Ruiz fight he would be regarded in a much higher standing…
Riddick Bowie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 931
Joined: 19 Jul 2003, 07:25

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Riddick Bowie »

Wales wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 23:00
Billy Tully wrote: 25 Mar 2022, 04:49
Wales wrote: 24 Mar 2022, 22:48 Disagree about RJJ

Calzaghe won his first world title in 1997 at 168
Jones Jnr moved to 175lbs a year earlier

In 2002 calzaghe was fighting Tucker Pudwill , 2 months earlier Jones had announced he was moving to heavyweight to fight Ruiz.
Jones was never the same when he came back down and lost 3 of his next 4 . Arguably lost all 4 as the win in the first contest against Tarver was incredibly debatable .

I still maintain one of Hopkins best performances was against Pavlik in the fight after Joe


Ottke fight should’ve happened . Joe would’ve won I reckon but still should’ve happened
Jones in 2001 was offering to come DOWN to super middle to fight Joe. Joe still wasn't interested.

Collins priced himself out of a fight with Jones, Eubank and Benn were petrified of him. People forget how intimidated fighters were of Jones in his day.
Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Controversial »

If there is a question mark over JC isn't there one over RJJ for testing positive for steroid use back in 2000?

"Both Jones and Hall tested positive for anabolic steroids after the fight. "Jones was five or six times over an acceptable level," said Jacob Hall, who was chairman of the Indiana State Athletic Commission. "Hall was about ten times above an acceptable level." Jones insisted his positive test was the result of ingesting the supplement Ripped Fuel. No penalties or suspensions were issued because Indiana, like many states, had no legal authority to test for steroids. The IBF sent letters to Jones and Hall informing each man that he had tested positive for an unspecified anabolic steroid, but no further action was taken"
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by polecateddy »

Controversial wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 05:30 If there is a question mark over JC isn't there one over RJJ for testing positive for steroid use back in 2000?

"Both Jones and Hall tested positive for anabolic steroids after the fight. "Jones was five or six times over an acceptable level," said Jacob Hall, who was chairman of the Indiana State Athletic Commission. "Hall was about ten times above an acceptable level." Jones insisted his positive test was the result of ingesting the supplement Ripped Fuel. No penalties or suspensions were issued because Indiana, like many states, had no legal authority to test for steroids. The IBF sent letters to Jones and Hall informing each man that he had tested positive for an unspecified anabolic steroid, but no further action was taken"
I don’t think there’s much question that a heck of a lot of American athletes of that era were on gear. Holyfield even got caught having human growth hormone delivered to one of his addresses for ‘Evan Field’ Lol I think in part they get away with it from a legacy point of view because the mud never seemed to stick. Unlike say Ben Johnson, who the media blew up into some kind of monster, although probably all of that 100 metre field were juiced to the gills.
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Controversial »

polecateddy wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:19
Controversial wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 05:30 If there is a question mark over JC isn't there one over RJJ for testing positive for steroid use back in 2000?

"Both Jones and Hall tested positive for anabolic steroids after the fight. "Jones was five or six times over an acceptable level," said Jacob Hall, who was chairman of the Indiana State Athletic Commission. "Hall was about ten times above an acceptable level." Jones insisted his positive test was the result of ingesting the supplement Ripped Fuel. No penalties or suspensions were issued because Indiana, like many states, had no legal authority to test for steroids. The IBF sent letters to Jones and Hall informing each man that he had tested positive for an unspecified anabolic steroid, but no further action was taken"
I don’t think there’s much question that a heck of a lot of American athletes of that era were on gear. Holyfield even got caught having human growth hormone delivered to one of his addresses for ‘Evan Field’ Lol I think in part they get away with it from a legacy point of view because the mud never seemed to stick. Unlike say Ben Johnson, who the media blew up into some kind of monster, although probably all of that 100 metre field were juiced to the gills.
I agree, the problem judging some fighters who have been caught out is we don't know just how much or often they 'cheated' that they got away with and how much better it made them. No about of gear makes anyone develop boxing ability but it would certainly give a great fighter an even bigger advantage.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by polecateddy »

Controversial wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:30
polecateddy wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:19
Controversial wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 05:30 If there is a question mark over JC isn't there one over RJJ for testing positive for steroid use back in 2000?

"Both Jones and Hall tested positive for anabolic steroids after the fight. "Jones was five or six times over an acceptable level," said Jacob Hall, who was chairman of the Indiana State Athletic Commission. "Hall was about ten times above an acceptable level." Jones insisted his positive test was the result of ingesting the supplement Ripped Fuel. No penalties or suspensions were issued because Indiana, like many states, had no legal authority to test for steroids. The IBF sent letters to Jones and Hall informing each man that he had tested positive for an unspecified anabolic steroid, but no further action was taken"
I don’t think there’s much question that a heck of a lot of American athletes of that era were on gear. Holyfield even got caught having human growth hormone delivered to one of his addresses for ‘Evan Field’ Lol I think in part they get away with it from a legacy point of view because the mud never seemed to stick. Unlike say Ben Johnson, who the media blew up into some kind of monster, although probably all of that 100 metre field were juiced to the gills.
I agree, the problem judging some fighters who have been caught out is we don't know just how much or often they 'cheated' that they got away with and how much better it made them. No about of gear makes anyone develop boxing ability but it would certainly give a great fighter an even bigger advantage.
It’s conjecture, but Canelo certainly stands out as someone who is more likely than not benefitting from a long term PED program. The growth changes in his face over time may suggest long term human growth hormone. He certainly punches a lot harder now than he ever did starting out.
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9152
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Controversial »

polecateddy wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:46
Controversial wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:30
polecateddy wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 08:19

I don’t think there’s much question that a heck of a lot of American athletes of that era were on gear. Holyfield even got caught having human growth hormone delivered to one of his addresses for ‘Evan Field’ Lol I think in part they get away with it from a legacy point of view because the mud never seemed to stick. Unlike say Ben Johnson, who the media blew up into some kind of monster, although probably all of that 100 metre field were juiced to the gills.
I agree, the problem judging some fighters who have been caught out is we don't know just how much or often they 'cheated' that they got away with and how much better it made them. No about of gear makes anyone develop boxing ability but it would certainly give a great fighter an even bigger advantage.
It’s conjecture, but Canelo certainly stands out as someone who is more likely than not benefitting from a long term PED program. The growth changes in his face over time may suggest long term human growth hormone. He certainly punches a lot harder now than he ever did starting out.
There certainly is something odd how he's moving through weights and not only getting stronger but beating bigger guys with not much trouble. Playing devils advocate he was only 15 when he turned pro so he would naturally fill out as he ages but even so not many guys move through the weights and stay on top like he does.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27448
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by stujones »

jimmystone wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 15:00
stujones wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 14:55 I was in contact at the time (quite regular) with a New York lawyer who also worked in boxing in. The name ashamedly escapes me, but he was heavily involved with Derrick Gainer who, remember at the time, was calling out Hamed all the time. Gainer off course was also part of the RJJ team.

However, he always used to say that he believed based on RJJ training that it was his intention to stay at heavyweight. Originally it wasnt, then it was and actually behind the scenes Roy was bulking up even more trying to negotiate a deal. Basically no deal happened and Roy went back down. So in reality Roy was probably even bigger when he decided to cut
Kurt Emhoff?
That's the fella :TU:
jameswilson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13360
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 18:01

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by jameswilson »

Billy Tully wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 04:20
Wales wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 23:00
Billy Tully wrote: 25 Mar 2022, 04:49

Jones in 2001 was offering to come DOWN to super middle to fight Joe. Joe still wasn't interested.

Collins priced himself out of a fight with Jones, Eubank and Benn were petrified of him. People forget how intimidated fighters were of Jones in his day.
Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
To be fair the people on here hate the modern day youtube channels who are able to instantly go and talk to the opposing promoter to call out bullsh1t 'yeah we offered Roy the fight for his biggest ever pay day and he turned it down' claims.

They much prefer the days where they'd watch Enzo Mac vs Rich LaMontagne and an 8 round mismatch as chief support followed by reading the allegedly Sun column 5 days later that claimed all the cruiserweight champs were offered the fight at the Newport Leisure centre.
Wee Tommy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Wee Tommy »

jameswilson wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 17:05
Billy Tully wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 04:20
Wales wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 23:00

Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
To be fair the people on here hate the modern day youtube channels who are able to instantly go and talk to the opposing promoter to call out bullsh1t 'yeah we offered Roy the fight for his biggest ever pay day and he turned it down' claims.

They much prefer the days where they'd watch Enzo Mac vs Rich LaMontagne and an 8 round mismatch as chief support followed by reading the allegedly Sun column 5 days later that claimed all the cruiserweight champs were offered the fight at the Newport Leisure centre.
:lol:

True
bigjack
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by bigjack »

Wee Tommy wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 06:57
jameswilson wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 17:05
Billy Tully wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 04:20

Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
To be fair the people on here hate the modern day youtube channels who are able to instantly go and talk to the opposing promoter to call out bullsh1t 'yeah we offered Roy the fight for his biggest ever pay day and he turned it down' claims.

They much prefer the days where they'd watch Enzo Mac vs Rich LaMontagne and an 8 round mismatch as chief support followed by reading the allegedly Sun column 5 days later that claimed all the cruiserweight champs were offered the fight at the Newport Leisure centre.
:lol:

True
He's 52 and still active :oo
Boxerbeetle
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 32660
Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Boxerbeetle »

jameswilson wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 17:05
Billy Tully wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 04:20
Wales wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 23:00

Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
To be fair the people on here hate the modern day youtube channels who are able to instantly go and talk to the opposing promoter to call out bullsh1t 'yeah we offered Roy the fight for his biggest ever pay day and he turned it down' claims.

They much prefer the days where they'd watch Enzo Mac vs Rich LaMontagne and an 8 round mismatch as chief support followed by reading the allegedly Sun column 5 days later that claimed all the cruiserweight champs were offered the fight at the Newport Leisure centre.
Bridgend Leisure Centre :shame:
maverick23
Cruiserweight
Posts: 10375
Joined: 26 Feb 2011, 18:20

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by maverick23 »

jameswilson wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 17:05
Billy Tully wrote: 28 Mar 2022, 04:20
Wales wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 23:00

Amazes me sometimes the ignorance and disrespect people have for fighters.

I’ll take the knock that the promoters didn’t want to put their guys in with jones.

But to say the likes of Benn, Eubank, Collins, Calzaghe etc … we’re petrified. They certainly weren’t - they’dve believed they could’ve won 100%
Their promoters would’ve made the calls

So Benn is petrified of Jones jnr but not Mclellan or Barkley?

Surely on paper Tyson Fury was petrified of Klitchko or Wilder
Ruiz must’ve been petrified of Joshua
Laing must’ve been petrified of Duran
Corrie Sanders of Klitchko

Unless a boxer believes he can win 100000% he will never make it beyond domestic level
Please, educate us on Benn, Collins, Eubank and Calzaghe's efforts to make a fight with a prime Roy Jones.

I'm going to enjoy this.
To be fair the people on here hate the modern day youtube channels who are able to instantly go and talk to the opposing promoter to call out bullsh1t 'yeah we offered Roy the fight for his biggest ever pay day and he turned it down' claims.

They much prefer the days where they'd watch Enzo Mac vs Rich LaMontagne and an 8 round mismatch as chief support followed by reading the allegedly Sun column 5 days later that claimed all the cruiserweight champs were offered the fight at the Newport Leisure centre.
In fairness that Enzo Mac fight did have a strong undercard. Co-main had 12-0 Tony Doherty against 10-12 Emmanuel Fleury who’d lost his last 4. Tony did well to stop him as Fleury only usually fought one or two weight divisions below him.

I do always wonder when people say that undercards/shows aren’t as good as they used to be what era they’re actually remembering. Perhaps it’s rose tinted glasses just remembering the fights that caught fire.
Deserter
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6439
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 10:01

Re: Joe Calzaghe - Question Mark

Post by Deserter »

maverick23 wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 08:21 In fairness that Enzo Mac fight did have a strong undercard. Co-main had 12-0 Tony Doherty against 10-12 Emmanuel Fleury who’d lost his last 4. Tony did well to stop him as Fleury only usually fought one or two weight divisions below him.
Doherty seemed really promising at one point but then his career really derailed - just looked at it again to refresh the memory and didn't realize he'd got stopped by a journeyman in his final fight... something must have gone badly wrong or he just lost interest?
Post Reply