What Impact Can Enzo Macca make on the Cruiser Division?

[Autobarn]

Is Enzo WBO champ by default now?

I like him to edge Hobson in another classic. No doubt he'll be brought along slowly, but how far can he go in the c/w division?

[stujones]

Is Enzo WBO champ by default now?

I like him to edge Hobson in another classic. No doubt he'll be brought along slowly, but how far can he go in the c/w division?

He has Heart and balls of steel (if not a great chin). I think he would be the underdog in any unification fight..... but he'd have a punchers chance and I think would test anyone in the world.

I just hope we don't have another Calzaghe and Nelson with another long career as WBO champion fighting (for the majority of times) second rate opponents.

[salaco]

None...I wouldn't even fancy him against the guys Nelson beat up most recently in his advanced age...

[glahn]

I think that he's improving all the time, and with his power and heart he can do well in what is a fairly weak division. I would give him a decent chance against pretty much any other current cruiser.

[Autobarn]

Is Enzo WBO champ by default now?

I like him to edge Hobson in another classic. No doubt he'll be brought along slowly, but how far can he go in the c/w division?

He has Heart and balls of steel (if not a great chin). I think he would be the underdog in any unification fight..... but he'd have a punchers chance and I think would test anyone in the world.

I just hope we don't have another Calzaghe and Nelson with another long career as WBO champion fighting (for the majority of times) second rate opponents.

I dunno, if Enzo is brought along at the right pace, and is able to fight men as good as Calzaghe's best foes Woodhall, Reid, Eubank, Lacy, Brewer & Mitchell, it would be good. I think we all judge Calzaghe harshly due to a bad 2004 and 2005 - the only two years where he didn't fight anyone good.

Enzo will need protecting a bit. Hopefully when he peaks he will be ready for proper world class foes.

[salaco]

I think that he's improving all the time, and with his power and heart he can do well in what is a fairly weak division. I would give him a decent chance against pretty much any other current cruiser.

Umm..the division is not that weak at the moment, although it may not look as strong as it did 2-3 years ago..fighters I would easily pick against enzo:

O'Neil Bell
Mormeck
Cunningham
Guillermo Jones
braithwaite (!)
Tokarev
Haye
Chris byrd
virgil hill (probably)

Those I would give a reasonable shot, make it 60/40 against enzo:
Huck
wlodarcyzk
aurino
cantatore
drozD
dale brown

Enzo is maybe top 15 in the division, but a solid title holder...not a chance...could make for solid tv fights however if matched correctly (ie not a cunningham or a hill for example)

[stujones]

dunno, if Enzo is brought along at the right pace, and is able to fight men as good as Calzaghe's best foes Woodhall, Reid, Eubank, Lacy, Brewer & Mitchell, it would be good. I think we all judge Calzaghe harshly due to a bad 2004 and 2005 - the only two years where he didn't fight anyone good.

Enzo will need protecting a bit. Hopefully when he peaks he will be ready for proper world class foes.

So whats the big wins Brewer has had post Calzaghe?

I would say 2001 was a bad year - Veit 1, McIntrye.

2002 wasn't great - Brewer, Pudwill, Jimenez

2000 - wasn't great either - Sheika, Starie.

1998 - was pretty useless aswell - Sobot and Gimenez.

So thats 1999 - Reid, Woodhall, 1997 (Eubank) 2003 (Mitchell) and 2006 Lacy as good years.

For a nine year reign, the fact we can count his half decent opponents on one hand is pretty dismassal. Thats not even one good opponent a year.

[Autobarn]

dunno, if Enzo is brought along at the right pace, and is able to fight men as good as Calzaghe's best foes Woodhall, Reid, Eubank, Lacy, Brewer & Mitchell, it would be good. I think we all judge Calzaghe harshly due to a bad 2004 and 2005 - the only two years where he didn't fight anyone good.

Enzo will need protecting a bit. Hopefully when he peaks he will be ready for proper world class foes.

So whats the big wins Brewer has had post Calzaghe?

I would say 2001 was a bad year - Veit 1, McIntrye.

2002 wasn't great - Brewer, Pudwill, Jimenez

2000 - wasn't great either - Sheika, Starie.

1998 - was pretty useless aswell - Sobot and Gimenez.

So thats 1999 - Reid, Woodhall, 1997 (Eubank) 2003 (Mitchell) and 2006 Lacy as good years.

For a nine year reign, the fact we can count his half decent opponents on one hand is pretty dismassal. Thats not even one good opponent a year.

I'm not talking about Brewer's career. he def wasn't the same after his last chance at a major title was repelled. soaked up a bit of a beating too.

let's see '97 Eubank, '98 nil, '99 Reid, '00 Woodhall (former WBC titlist) & Sheika (decent enough fighter coming off a win over Glen Johnson) in fact Starie is quite good as well if we count "decent fighters", '01 nil, '02 Brewer, '03 Mitchell...

Interestingly, Mkrtchian has just beaten a top ten fighter Chanet. Add Lacy to that & you can actually count 'em on two full hands

after Mitchell, it was clearly coming to a peak, then...nothing of worth till 2006. The momentum was derailed. It's the horrible lull in his career at that point that turned many ppl off. Thankfully now it's back where it should be.

[silkov]

dunno, if Enzo is brought along at the right pace, and is able to fight men as good as Calzaghe's best foes Woodhall, Reid, Eubank, Lacy, Brewer & Mitchell, it would be good. I think we all judge Calzaghe harshly due to a bad 2004 and 2005 - the only two years where he didn't fight anyone good.

Enzo will need protecting a bit. Hopefully when he peaks he will be ready for proper world class foes.

So whats the big wins Brewer has had post Calzaghe?

I would say 2001 was a bad year - Veit 1, McIntrye.

2002 wasn't great - Brewer, Pudwill, Jimenez

2000 - wasn't great either - Sheika, Starie.

1998 - was pretty useless aswell - Sobot and Gimenez.

So thats 1999 - Reid, Woodhall, 1997 (Eubank) 2003 (Mitchell) and 2006 Lacy as good years.

For a nine year reign, the fact we can count his half decent opponents on one hand is pretty dismassal. Thats not even one good opponent a year.

I'm not talking about Brewer's career. he def wasn't the same after his last chance at a major title was repelled. soaked up a bit of a beating too.

let's see '97 Eubank, '98 nil, '99 Reid, '00 Woodhall (former WBC titlist) & Sheika (decent enough fighter coming off a win over Glen Johnson) in fact Starie is quite good as well if we count "decent fighters", '01 nil, '02 Brewer, '03 Mitchell...

Interestingly, Mkrtchian has just beaten a top ten fighter Chanet. Add Lacy to that & you can actually count 'em on two full hands

after Mitchell, it was clearly coming to a peak, then...nothing of worth till 2006. The momentum was derailed. It's the horrible lull in his career at that point that turned many ppl off. Thankfully now it's back where it should be.

It was back on track but the Bika fight is a huge disapointment and will undo a lot of the good that the Lacy win did... if Joe doesnt have a genuine 'big' fight next time then he'll never gain the respect he seems to want.

[Autobarn]

So whats the big wins Brewer has had post Calzaghe?

I would say 2001 was a bad year - Veit 1, McIntrye.

2002 wasn't great - Brewer, Pudwill, Jimenez

2000 - wasn't great either - Sheika, Starie.

1998 - was pretty useless aswell - Sobot and Gimenez.

So thats 1999 - Reid, Woodhall, 1997 (Eubank) 2003 (Mitchell) and 2006 Lacy as good years.

For a nine year reign, the fact we can count his half decent opponents on one hand is pretty dismassal. Thats not even one good opponent a year.

I'm not talking about Brewer's career. he def wasn't the same after his last chance at a major title was repelled. soaked up a bit of a beating too.

let's see '97 Eubank, '98 nil, '99 Reid, '00 Woodhall (former WBC titlist) & Sheika (decent enough fighter coming off a win over Glen Johnson) in fact Starie is quite good as well if we count "decent fighters", '01 nil, '02 Brewer, '03 Mitchell...

Interestingly, Mkrtchian has just beaten a top ten fighter Chanet. Add Lacy to that & you can actually count 'em on two full hands

after Mitchell, it was clearly coming to a peak, then...nothing of worth till 2006. The momentum was derailed. It's the horrible lull in his career at that point that turned many ppl off. Thankfully now it's back where it should be.

It was back on track but the Bika fight is a huge disapointment and will undo a lot of the good that the Lacy win did... if Joe doesnt have a genuine 'big' fight next time then he'll never gain the respect he seems to want.

I agree with you there in terms of BIKA as a name.

However, I know he can fight. A lot of ppl underplay his fight with Beyer. i.e. 'so what he did well for 4 rds, beyer is a slow starter who comes on.' thing is Bika is a slow starter who comes on like a monster late

But given the predominantly negative opinion on these boards, they are undoing the good they've done. I'll be happy if I see a good fight. However, most experts will see this as a lose-lose fight. Wipe out Bika and he gets no credit. Has a competitive fight with Bika and he'll get slated for not dominating.

I do agree though. Really, at the very least he should be fighting Andrade (who looked good vs Alien Grant last week). The fact that he had a title fight this year will have done him good. Maybe I'm off my head, but I think it'll be a real fight

[states]

Is Enzo WBO champ by default now?

I like him to edge Hobson in another classic. No doubt he'll be brought along slowly, but how far can he go in the c/w division?

I like Enzo, have done since I first saw him. It was hard to defend his choice of opponents at times, because he was fighting some real corpses until this year. But when he's been in with a live opponent, such as Scott, Hobson or Dominguez, the fights have been thoroughly entertaining. I'm gutted the Nelson fight is off, because that would have seen Enzo in against a top 5 (at least) cruiserweight. Now that's off, I expect Hobson to be the best fighter Maccarinelli faces for a few years at least. I take him to stop Hobson in the rematch, btw. Glad Hobson is getting the rematch as well, even though I'd rather have seen Nelson-Maccarinelli.

As for the world stage, I think he could be a dangerous opponent for anyone. Obviously, the likes of Mormeck and Bell, and indeed a few others would start as favourite, especially given the fact that Enzo can always be hit and hurt. But the two fights this year (along with the Scott fight) have shown that he's got real heart. Couple that with his considerable power and you've got a guy who can give anyone problems.

Providing he gets past Hobson again, I'd love to see him in against the best out there, as opposed to the usual WBO crap, but I don't think that'll happen. And I'd love to see him in against Haye. I've been saying it for a few years now, and I stand by it: Macca would spark Haye.

[stujones]

I do wonder if Carl Thompson can be lured into a comeback. It seemed like it was never going to happen with Johnny, but who knows with Maccarinelli (or Hobson).

[states]

I do wonder if Carl Thompson can be lured into a comeback. It seemed like it was never going to happen with Johnny, but who knows with Maccarinelli (or Hobson).

To be honest with you Stu, I really hope he can't be. I know Thompson has been written off as shot more times than any boxer in living memory (I think I've done it at least half a dozen times), but he really did look gone in his last fight. His legs first seemed to go about a decade ago, but it looked like he had nothing left in them at all last time out.

[Autobarn]

I do wonder if Carl Thompson can be lured into a comeback. It seemed like it was never going to happen with Johnny, but who knows with Maccarinelli (or Hobson).

I think Thompson knows he had a lucky escape with the tubby Frenchman and decided to call it a day. He tried out lots of old school moves that night but none of them worked. Knowing that he can't make fights easier must be discouraging.

[stujones]

I'm not talking about Brewer's career. he def wasn't the same after his last chance at a major title was repelled. soaked up a bit of a beating too.

let's see '97 Eubank, '98 nil, '99 Reid, '00 Woodhall (former WBC titlist) & Sheika (decent enough fighter coming off a win over Glen Johnson) in fact Starie is quite good as well if we count "decent fighters", '01 nil, '02 Brewer, '03 Mitchell...

Interestingly, Mkrtchian has just beaten a top ten fighter Chanet. Add Lacy to that & you can actually count 'em on two full hands

after Mitchell, it was clearly coming to a peak, then...nothing of worth till 2006. The momentum was derailed. It's the horrible lull in his career at that point that turned many ppl off. Thankfully now it's back where it should be.

I really don't know if we should count a guy who lost to Tony Booth as decent. It wasn't untill the Woods fight (first one) that Johnson was considered world class. Indeed, many people thought he wasn't deserving of his IBF eliminator (as it was originally scheduled) vs Woods. Don't worry, Sheika's name appears on a few of Joe's rival champions record (Lacy, Beyer etc) - and I dismiss him as being a decent opponent there also. He's okay to a level and is a decent gate keeper to world class, but world class himself he isn't. Much like Brian Magee. Also, I did think Johnson nicked the fight vs Sheika.

David Starie, now I championed Starie for years and I would like to see him back - but worthy to fight for a world title.... Not in 2000, he'd just lost to Dean Francis. He later went on a good run and I thought deserved his chance vs Ottke - but was again exposed. He had alot of tools and a good fighter at his level, but that was European at best.

Mger whatever his name. Yes, he has done well to win the EBU title, but Jackson Chanet was never a top ten fighter and he beat an overhyped Tsypko (who also wasn't a top ten fighter). Calzaghe made Lacy look average, but Mger IS average. If we are basing his opponents as one decent win over over-hyped fighters - then we might as well as Veit to the list.

Okay, I'll give you Brewer - but had just lost to Antwun Echols and was never a good champion. It was a good fight though and I can see it can be argued the Joe aged him. Boderline worthy (given his loss to Echols) but fair enough. I do say though, the Brewer should have been a starting point for Joe. He was good enough to beat him in 1998-1999.... this is when he should have fought him, and then progress from there.

So I believe it should be - Eubank, Reid, Woodhall (although faded and his heart wasn't in it), Mitchell, Brewer and Lacy..... Okay I stand corrected, you do need more than one hand - 6 opponents worthy of title opportunities. The rest were not at the time AND haven't done enough since to warrant a shot. It looks like on Mger has the possibility of proving me wrong.

I still think 6 in nine years is pretty dismal, and only two of those 6 I would class as real danger fights. Eubank, give the experience of Joe at the time and Lacy. The rest (and Eubank) were either faded or had been exposed just BEFORE Joe faced them.

Joe really should have had at least 4-5 danger fights, and a futher 7-8 acceptable fights by now.

[Autobarn]

I'm not talking about Brewer's career. he def wasn't the same after his last chance at a major title was repelled. soaked up a bit of a beating too.

let's see '97 Eubank, '98 nil, '99 Reid, '00 Woodhall (former WBC titlist) & Sheika (decent enough fighter coming off a win over Glen Johnson) in fact Starie is quite good as well if we count "decent fighters", '01 nil, '02 Brewer, '03 Mitchell...

Interestingly, Mkrtchian has just beaten a top ten fighter Chanet. Add Lacy to that & you can actually count 'em on two full hands

after Mitchell, it was clearly coming to a peak, then...nothing of worth till 2006. The momentum was derailed. It's the horrible lull in his career at that point that turned many ppl off. Thankfully now it's back where it should be.

I really don't know if we should count a guy who lost to Tony Booth as decent. It wasn't untill the Woods fight (first one) that Johnson was considered world class. Indeed, many people thought he wasn't deserving of his IBF eliminator (as it was originally scheduled) vs Woods. Don't worry, Sheika's name appears on a few of Joe's rival champions record (Lacy, Beyer etc) - and I dismiss him as being a decent opponent there also. He's okay to a level and is a decent gate keeper to world class, but world class himself he isn't. Much like Brian Magee. Also, I did think Johnson nicked the fight vs Sheika.

David Starie, now I championed Starie for years and I would like to see him back - but worthy to fight for a world title.... Not in 2000, he'd just lost to Dean Francis. He later went on a good run and I thought deserved his chance vs Ottke - but was again exposed. He had alot of tools and a good fighter at his level, but that was European at best.

Mger whatever his name. Yes, he has done well to win the EBU title, but Jackson Chanet was never a top ten fighter and he beat an overhyped Tsypko (who also wasn't a top ten fighter). Calzaghe made Lacy look average, but Mger IS average. If we are basing his opponents as one decent win over over-hyped fighters - then we might as well as Veit to the list.

Okay, I'll give you Brewer - but had just lost to Antwun Echols and was never a good champion. It was a good fight though and I can see it can be argued the Joe aged him. Boderline worthy (given his loss to Echols) but fair enough. I do say though, the Brewer should have been a starting point for Joe. He was good enough to beat him in 1998-1999.... this is when he should have fought him, and then progress from there.

So I believe it should be - Eubank, Reid, Woodhall (although faded and his heart wasn't in it), Mitchell, Brewer and Lacy..... Okay I stand corrected, you do need more than one hand - 6 opponents worthy of title opportunities. The rest were not at the time AND haven't done enough since to warrant a shot. It looks like on Mger has the possibility of proving me wrong.

I still think 6 in nine years is pretty dismal, and only two of those 6 I would class as real danger fights. Eubank, give the experience of Joe at the time and Lacy. The rest (and Eubank) were either faded or had been exposed just BEFORE Joe faced them.

Joe really should have had at least 4-5 danger fights, and a futher 7-8 acceptable fights by now.

i was being optimistic on starie and mkrtchian - only cos you were being negative, lol

one thing is certain - woodhall, eubank, brewer, mitchell, lacy, reid were all flawed fighters, all capable of losing to top ten fighters, HOWEVER all capable of beating top ten fighters. so they're not superstar wins but they are good wins. I'm not saying they are anything more than that. Some of thse guys could really take youre head off, others were capable boxers.

there are two names that sadly pulled out on calzaghe that would have raied him to a higher level, yet it was they who pulled out on Joe - Collins and Hopkins, both of which were winnable if very tough.

What can I say about Starie. He's a solid fighter. Certainly, Francis would've been preferable. For me, an all time fantasy match up. Francis would've been steered toward the WBC title, i reckon.

sheika had just beaten johnson. johnson had given a performance every bit as good as the ones at light heavy that would follow (ie Woods, Jones etc) - by pushing Ottke to the limit in an IBF title challenge. So Johnsonw as a danger man then & Sheika dropped & IMo outworked him.

[stujones]

Yep, I have no problems with the 6 fighters mentioned as good wins. I would even call Eubank and Lacy boderline Superstar wins. Lacy had some good wins and was being hyped as the next big thing. Eubank was a proud champion (albeit favourite) and Calzaghe was inexperienced.

However, I don't think it is impressive that in nine years Joe only has 6 good wins and two boderline Superstar wins. The MAJORITY of his championship fights should have fallen to good win category (including a few superstar fights).... Yes, of course he is allowed one or two easier nights in the office - but it should be in the minority - it not. All the rest, IMO (yes still think Sheika) doesn't fall in the good category.

The vast majority of Lewis title fights and the majority of Hamed's fall in the the "good" section, with one or two Superstar fights for good measure. Thats why I said their resumes are clearly better than Joe's in the P4P thread.

[Autobarn]

Yep, I have no problems with the 6 fighters mentioned as good wins. I would even call Eubank and Lacy boderline Superstar wins. Lacy had some good wins and was being hyped as the next big thing. Eubank was a proud champion (albeit favourite) and Calzaghe was inexperienced.

However, I don't think it is impressive that in nine years Joe only has 6 good wins and two boderline Superstar wins. The MAJORITY of his championship fights should have fallen to good win category (including a few superstar fights).... Yes, of course he is allowed one or two easier nights in the office - but it should be in the minority - it not. All the rest, IMO (yes still think Sheika) doesn't fall in the good category.

The vast majority of Lewis title fights and the majority of Hamed's fall in the the "good" section, with one or two Superstar fights for good measure. Thats why I said their resumes are clearly better than Joe's in the P4P thread.

true he should have more good wins, that's why the next two years are so crucial. i do think the bad 2004 and 2005 have a lot to do with the negativity surrounding JC's body of work - some of that was out of his hands i.e. personal problems, legit injuries & Universum pissing him around. A Kessler fight is a must (if MK wins on oct 14) as it would make up for a lot.

I think Calzaghe needs a challenge if he is to perform. Lacy was a bit of a step up, as unlike the previous good wins, Lacy was actually in his prime, undefeated and holding a belt. Next we need to see JC fight an unbeaten boxer with TWO belts & more importantly some serious skills

[glahn]

Okay, let's raise another question from this old debate. Who SHOULD Joe have fought during his reign?

Ottke, obviously, although that fight was never going to be easy to make, and it seems to me that the German was always less keen on it than Calzaghe.

Aside from that, who? Would Larsen have counted as a good win? And who could he have fought that would have been in the superstar category? I can't think of many except for Roy Jones, and that fight was never going to happen realistically.

Anyone?

[Max Molyneux]

Guess Enzo could beat Bell but he'd be limited for a really skilled cruiser.

[Autobarn]

Okay, let's raise another question from this old debate. Who SHOULD Joe have fought during his reign?

Ottke, obviously, although that fight was never going to be easy to make, and it seems to me that the German was always less keen on it than Calzaghe.

Aside from that, who? Would Larsen have counted as a good win? And who could he have fought that would have been in the superstar category? I can't think of many except for Roy Jones, and that fight was never going to happen realistically.

Anyone?

Ottke and Larsen, those are the only two he needed to go with the top Brits and power puching Americans he bested. Kessler would easily make up for that 'oversight' however

Back to the main thread, I think Enzo - Hobson II will be another classic. Hobson I, Dominguez & Hobson II are solid preparations for being a world title holder

[leforge]

I think Hobson v maccrineeli 2 should happen next year, Enzo should fight someone else first. So if Hobson loses does he still retain the WBU title.