Does JC surpass Hopkins' legacy if he beats Kessler?

T.M.K · Post by **T.M.K** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:52

Hi gents,

I'm asking this question here as over on the general forum these topics seem to get a bit heated a go off-track a bit quicker (and more violently).

If Joe Calzaghe beats Mikkel Kessler (by hook or by crook: DQ, Cuts, KO, Pts) and annexes the WBC/WBA titles while making his 21st succesful defence...does he eclipse the achievement of Bernard Hopkins' run at Middleweight?

Now this is not a "Hopkins would beat him" question, it is about acheivement: defences, length of title reign, belts won, opponents beat, fighting at home or abroad, unifications, quality of opposition etc. Personally, even though Hopkins unified all 4 versions in seperate fights, I think Calzaghe overtakes him if he beats Kessler up.

Thoughts, views & opinions?

best wishes

"T.M.K"

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:52

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:54

Good question, you have to compare competetion and I think Calazages is a little better. Hopkins comp is pretty poor all in all. They both will have unified a division

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:55

by hook or by corrk

I don't know what that last thing is but it sounds dangerous

No by the way i suppose they are about neck and neck but Hopkins may be slightly ahead especially if he defeats Wright as i expect he will.

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:56

Good question. Hopkins has this mystique about him which is virtually blasphemy to challenge, while Calzaghe's achievements are very similar and yet he is usually criticised.

I'd say beating Kessler would put Calzaghe CLOSE to Hopkins, but it's not enough to overtake him. The vast majority of Hopkins' defences were of underwhelming quality and in this regard he and Calzaghe are similar but get respect for longevity. However, looking at the later - and hallmark - defences, Lacy and Kessler and good but, let's face it, not on the same level as De La Hoya and Trinidad.

T.M.K · Post by **T.M.K** » 13 Jul 2007, 05:57

steve689 wrote:
Hopkins may be slightly ahead especially if he defeats Wright as i expect he will.

Hopkins' legacy at Middleweight ended with the second Taylor fight.

"T.M.K"

T.M.K · Post by **T.M.K** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:01

oliverfennell wrote:Good question. Hopkins has this mystique about him which is virtually blasphemy to challenge, while Calzaghe's achievements are very similar and yet he is usually criticised.

Exactly... they forget defences 1-to-13, and the fact it took him 3 attempts to win the title.

oliverfennell wrote: However, looking at the later - and hallmark - defences, Lacy and Kessler and good but, let's face it, not on the same level as De La Hoya and Trinidad.

That's the bit isn't it..... if Calzaghe could get to 22 or 23 defences and have Kessler, Taylor and Wright on his resume then it would be almost clear-cut wouldn't it.

best wishes

"T.M.K"

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:18

oliverfennell wrote:Good question. Hopkins has this mystique about him which is virtually blasphemy to challenge, while Calzaghe's achievements are very similar and yet he is usually criticised.

I'd say beating Kessler would put Calzaghe CLOSE to Hopkins, but it's not enough to overtake him. The vast majority of Hopkins' defences were of underwhelming quality and in this regard he and Calzaghe are similar but get respect for longevity. However, looking at the later - and hallmark - defences, Lacy and Kessler and good but, let's face it, not on the same level as De La Hoya and Trinidad.

dlh and trinidad are smaller men. in addition, oscar was in over his head and past his prime.

Calzaghe beat someone his own size in Lacy. Stopping Lacy's momentum and beating him so badly that he'll never become what he was supposed to. Kessler has class, ability, ring generalship (to Lacy's power and workrate). If Joe comes off with wins over both, then he has conquered a better division than Hopkins and actually beaten quality (Lacy) and elite (Kessler) fighters in his own division.

I believe that whatever happens Nov 3, that Kessler will be a future great. One with terrific boxing ability (Hopkins not really beaten a really good pure BOXER)

I'm sorry, but Joppy and Keith Holmes - Hopkins' best wins over middleweights - don't quite compare.

If Joe followed up with a win over, say, the Taylor-Pavlik winner (hopefully Pavlik) then he'd still be facing someone his own size in fact bigger) as both are big, weight weakened 160s

Also, there's the Q of whether Hopkins actually beats Wright...

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:29

It's fair to say ODLH was past his prime but Trinidad looked to be peaking and looked his most formidable at middleweight. However, regardless of weight class and career stage, I say they hold more sway than Lacy and Kessler because both have been P4P rulers (Trinidad was actually considered P4P BEST at the time of the Hopkins fight) while Lacy and Kessler, for all their qualities, have not yet even been P4P top ten.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:30

oliverfennell wrote:Lacy and Kessler and good but, let's face it, not on the same level as De La Hoya and Trinidad.

No their allot better super middleweights than Delahoya and Trinidad were as middleweights

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:31

Right to say about Oscar, but Felix was looking like a very strong and powerful middleweight, smashed a prime Joppy to bits and was considered a strong favourite to beat Hopkins.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:33

Trinidad smashed Joppy to bits in between spells of being outboxed by Joppy though if my memory serves me correctly?

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:34

So it wasn't UTTER DOMINATION but it was still an emphatic, resounding result.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:50

I'd say Hopkins stays ahead of Calzaghe for me, mainly because he took part in a unification tournament and prevailed, thumping Trinidad in the process.

conan_the_cribber · Post by **conan_the_cribber** » 13 Jul 2007, 06:55

The answer is a resouding NO.

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.

Although they became champions around the same time, Hopkins unified years before Calzaghe did. Calzaghe could've fought Ottke or Beyer, but they didnt make the fights. Calzaghe's biggest wins till Lacy were over people that Ottke had already beat. Hopkins took out people that other middleweights hadn't beaten. And the real difference is.....

...Hopkins jumped two weight classes and beat the #1 light heavy in Tarver. Calzaghe has done nothing in this calibre.

Sure Hopkins, at age 40 and 41 lost narrowly in two competitve fights to the up and coming p4per Taylor. But it's hard to hold that against him.

Calzaghe might get there, if he beats Kessler, then goes to Light Heavy and beats Dawson or Tarver or has a couple of wins over someone decent like Woods and Johnson.

Till then, a definite second place in the legacy stakes.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Jul 2007, 07:38

I'd say that if Calzaghe wins against Kessler, there ain't a lot in it. A trip to light heavy and a win over a top flight LH, and I think it's certainly close.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 13 Jul 2007, 07:46

If Calzaghe had the Beyer or Otke name on his record, and then went on to beat Kessler, then I would place Calzaghe ahead of Hopkins.

But he doesn't have the Otke/Beyer name and for me even with a Kessler win, that keeps him just behind Hopkins.

I would say though that Hopkins is continualy overated, and it does bug me when he is mentioned in the same breath as Hagler.

bugs · Post by **bugs** » 13 Jul 2007, 07:49

conan_the_cribber wrote:The answer is a resouding NO.
Calzaghe's biggest wins till Lacy were over people that Ottke had already beat. Hopkins took out people that other middleweights hadn't beaten.

Ottke never fought Eubank and fought Reid after Calzaghe . . . And how many times did Ottke fight a guy with an unbeated record? And Joe offered and agreed to fight Ottke and Hopkins for that matter, only for them to scupper the fights.

I think that a straight out comparison of quality opponents between the two has Calazghe ahead, and if he beats Kessler he is further ahead, and he is more fun to watch and more dominant. Hopkins is beatable and boring.

Still got my tickets for the fight, now just have to hope neither fighter pulls aout and I am left with non-refunadable tickets to watch TBA vs TBA

Smit · Post by **Smit** » 13 Jul 2007, 09:04

bugs wrote: Ottke never fought Eubank and fought Reid after Calzaghe . . . And how many times did Ottke fight a guy with an unbeated record? And Joe offered and agreed to fight Ottke and Hopkins for that matter, only for them to scupper the fights.

I assume you mean undefeated?
In that case Ottke fought as many undefeated opponents as Calzaghe has (not counting the upcoming Kessler fight)

chinny · Post by **chinny** » 13 Jul 2007, 09:47

Hopkins reign is a little tarnished by the fact he was soundly beaten by Jones in 93.
Then when he did get another chance he could only draw the first time with Mercado.
The 20 successful defences was also actually 19 due to the NC in one of his fights with Allen.
Totally disagree with the poster who favoured BH as he came out on top of a unification tournament. How would beating Lacy and Kessler not be coming out on top of a unification 'tournament'?

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 13 Jul 2007, 10:04

chinny wrote:Hopkins reign is a little tarnished by the fact he was soundly beaten by Jones in 93.
Then when he did get another chance he could only draw the first time with Mercado.
The 20 successful defences was also actually 19 due to the NC in one of his fights with Allen.
Totally disagree with the poster who favoured BH as he came out on top of a unification tournament. How would beating Lacy and Kessler not be coming out on top of a unification 'tournament'?

Right, it would be in all but the warped minds of the IBF.

Calzaghe has won the WBO and IBF, which he never lost in the ring.
Kessler has won the WBC and WBA.

Berrio's and Mundine's title claims are all but worthless and only arose due to politics.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Jul 2007, 16:14

No.

Hopkins unified the devision and fought absolutely EVERYBODY in the devision, mandatories and voluntaries. He might not have the Superstars names, but there was no other Middleweight, aside Light Middle Wright, who he is fighting this month albeit at a different weight and Harry Simon (not really Hopkins' fault... the guy been doing time).

From Eastman to Robert Allen... there was nobody who anyone could say "well he might give Hopkins a go" from overhyped prospect, long time undefeated fighters or guys who looked good.. Hopkins fought and beat (except Jones) them all. Okay, there wasn't the greatest talent depth there- but not his fault and whats to say the likes of Holmes and Joppy wouldn't have been long reigning excellent champions if it wasn't for Bernard beating them.

Calzaghe need Ottke, Beyer, Catley, Lucas to match Hopkins.... So he'll never equal Bernard IMO. Even after Kessler Calzaghe needs Bute/Froch to completely clean out the devision.

However, a win over Hopkins and of course perspective will change.

T.M.K · Post by **T.M.K** » 15 Jul 2007, 05:30

This is great guys, I'm enjoying readingall these opinions. So let's just say that Calzaghe beats Kessler, and then next year beats:

1) The Winner of Taylor-Pavlik (or just Taylor should the fight not happen)

2) Anthny Mundine

3) Whomever is better placed out of Froch or Bute.

If Calzaghegot to 24 defences with 3 names like those above on his record, would he overtake Hopkins? (I am leaving out the winner of Hopkins-Wright as I don't think either will have Super-Middle on their agenda).

best wishes

"T.M.K"

ps: again - to those who don't get it: this is not Hopkins vs Calzaghe CAREERwise, it is just title-reign, so beating Tarver is not a factor in the comparison, and neither is Joe moving to 175lbs.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 15 Jul 2007, 05:47

Say he gets wins over Lacy and Kessler. That pisses on Keith Holmes & Joppy.

Hopkins' opposition is nothing to write home about - his skills are.

Calzaghe had Reid, Brewer, Woodhall, Mitchell, Sheika (who beat Johnson), Euank (who showed a fierce workrate), Lacy. And if we credit Hopkins for fighting everyone, well then Mkrtchian, Bika, Veit and Starie are also credible (if underwhelming) opponents.

Also, you're ALL forgetting he's about 5 years younger than Hopkins, so in a way he's not had the time to do as much as Bernard. But with Bernard much of it is quantity over quality, much of it was beating smaller men, much of it was mercilessly fouling some ordinary fighters and it took the guy 2 tries to win a vacant belt.

Saying he'll never match Hopkins - who kept fighting Echols and Allen - is very odd.

Joe doing what he did to Lacy, which was awesome and shocking, actually makes up a lot of ground. Look at Bernard's messy maul with Vanderpool (who was beaten down by Lacy).

A lot of fights didn't happen for Joe, but ditto for Hopkins, who actually priced out vs Joe.

IF Joe beats Kessler, he has beaten a peer, an equal, an elite fighter in his prime.

There are things I want to see Joe do. Like beat Inkin (mandatory), beat Froch (most dangerous prospect in the division - sod Bute, he will choke on the occasion) and a guy who America's big on, like Pavlik.

Sod Ottke & Larsen, if he's fighting Kessler I say, and bugger Catley if he beat every other top Brit in his weight and can add Froch. Kessler has beaten the guys Joe didn't bother fighting, so in a way a win over MK makes up for the opposition lapses by "assimilation."

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 15 Jul 2007, 05:53

T.M.K wrote:This is great guys, I'm enjoying readingall these opinions. So let's just say that Calzaghe beats Kessler, and then next year beats:

1) The Winner of Taylor-Pavlik (or just Taylor should the fight not happen)

2) Anthny Mundine

3) Whomever is better placed out of Froch or Bute.

If Calzaghegot to 24 defences with 3 names like those above on his record, would he overtake Hopkins? (I am leaving out the winner of Hopkins-Wright as I don't think either will have Super-Middle on their agenda).

best wishes

"T.M.K"

ps: again - to those who don't get it: this is not Hopkins vs Calzaghe CAREERwise, it is just title-reign, so beating Tarver is not a factor in the comparison, and neither is Joe moving to 175lbs.

Joe's got a way better division than Hopkins had. Right now is when all the good fighters have arrived. He makes his mark on these guys, he surpasses Hopkins pretty convincingly.

From the start, Bernard was ALWAYS looking down to light middle and welter for his big bouts. When he first won his IBF belt 1st thing he did was called out Terry Norris. Because of this there is room for Joe to surpass him with something to spare.

Hopkins has had no Kesslers, Froches, Inkins, Pavliks (almost certain to move up with Taylor preparing to duck him). Bernard adjusted to a lot of styles and is a master, and will look great with say wins over both Tarver and Winky (for something called the 'World Not Lineal Light Heavyweight Title'). But I think Joe has a fair bit left in the tank to do something big.