BoxRec

Just adding to the thread my tribute to Joe (sidestepping the current debate).

Calzaghe for me was a terrific fighter who gave everything for the sport. He had a good career and achieved more than most in the sport. In my eyes, a real quality operator. Im sure his stock will grow as time passes on.

Thank you for the great moments Joe... All the Best.

Again if Taylor and Typysko can school/nearly school Lacy, Sven should be able to

As for 'gift decisions' 'referee sympathy', the same could be said for Calzaghe with his Reid/Hopkins decisions and his premature stoppages, ie Mitchell

Yes but the post Calzaghe Lacy wasn't the same as the pre Calzaghe Lacy.

Definitely, Joe had the benefit of some early stoppages. Flustered opponent can't fire back during 5-second bust and...it's over. Brewer, Sheika, Manfredo. And of course, 2 narrow decision wins that could have gone the other way.

I don't buy into the unbeaten record crap, it always means you've been matched right if you're undefeated. But still to have lasted that long, to have not slipped up so badly as Reid, Woodhall, Catley all did, does show some quality in Joe.

I'm not convinced by 20 or 21 defences of a title that allows such a consistently poor level of competition and so few mandatories either; but the unifications were outstanding performances.

And of course, 2 narrow decision wins that could have gone the other way.

While I feel that the Hopkins fight could have gone either way, I don't think there was much controversy with Reid(by the way Reid is quite a local lad so I am quite biased towards him) I think Joe definitely deserved that one.

Well done Joe and thank you for all the entertainment and exciting moments over the years. I expected to see people being critical here and you are entitled to your opinions but I believe you are being harsh and unfair. Almost all fighters can be accused of avoiding, not unifying, not fighting the people we wanted to see them fight. As you all know it only takes one good punch and the fight is over. Most of the time Joe didnt get hit flush but when he did he got up and went on to win. He survived a long career with his 0 intact and for me he is a great of British boxing. For those of you who say but he didnt fight Hopkins in his prime, I remember him pleading with Hopkins, who told him to get in line. He got the fights Warren could get him and thats that, what more could he do.

Calzaghe was a decent operator with a cleverly managed career.

However his shoe-shining punches, bum wiggling and "nobody will fight me" that turned into the "He dont deserve to fight me" attitude put me off him.

And his blatant Hatton coat tailing was a joke. Especially when he slated his Kostya victory and also when Hatton left Warren.

He's two faced in everything he does or says.

One thing you could never accuse Carl Froch of being !

On one hand we had Calzaghe win his WBOgus title on the undercard of a Naz fight, who then defended it against 19-11 Branko Sobot....

Then we have Froch fighting unbeaten Pascal in a domestic FOTY candidate and then is gonna take short money and fly to former Olympian and former WBC,WBA,WBO,IBF middleweight Taylor's back yard for his first ever defence - and is already talking about Bute then Kessler immediately after !

I hope the Cobra pulls it off - as his attitude is bloody refreshing compared to certain other spoon-fed, blinged up media whores who masquerade as boxers, yet only pick on spent or smaller opposition in their own back yards.

Most of the complaints that I hear from friends who are into martial arts, on the subject of boxing, are in evidence throughout Joe's career sadly. Many ppl just aren't impressed with a man that beats up ppl who have next to no chance.

It will be damn good if Froch can go the direct route and be successful. Calzaghe obviously went a very indirect route to his success.

Calzaghe has opened doors for British fighters in America, I would think. Though he waited a bleeding long time i.e. The Right Time when he was most likely to beat those two ageing Americans.

gobbles wrote:
well, I saw Ottke live twice and about half his fights on TV or online. The thing you really noticed about him up close was just how inactive he was. He would try and steal every round. Better opposition? Well he fought Johnson (Johnson bitterly disputed the decision) but he went the distance with Tocker Pudwill and twice taken to a hometown split decision by Brewer. Overall he faced slightly better opposition at the time when both were champions together, but that's the money German TV put in. Of the common opponents, Calzaghe beat them all much more convincingly.
Ottke was no mug, but he was no Calzaghe.

I disagree with some of this - no Ottke opponent was ROBBED... there were a few close decisions, but no robberies. and TWO robberies against Brewer? - the second fight Ottke clearly won.

Beat them all more convincingly ?- Journo's pressed Mitchell, Starie and Reid after facing them both - Starie and Mitchell said it would be a tough fight to call (Ottke vs Joe)... Starie said, Ottke could move backwards faster than he could move forward... and that wasn't a sarcastic comment it was a compliment of how slippy he was. Calzaghe was hardly convincing against Starie.

Actually, I think that the Mitchell fight was a similar level of performance... very different, but in their same ways equally convincing. Ottke boxed Mitchell's brains off for most of the fight (he was in trouble in the last round), one of the most dubious "split" decisions I have seen. Calzaghe did well to catch Mitchell when under pressure to turn the fight around - but before then, well he was making very silly errors.

Rob Reid went for Calzaghe convincingly yes.

G0mez wrote:
He's two faced in everything he does or says.

Interesting that the laws of libel don't seem to operate here.

As opposed to Froch not being a spoon-fed fighter, what proof is there of that? When has he ever gone to an opponent's backyard? How many times did he box on a non-Hennessy show? What fight has he ever had where he was not the overwhelming favourite? In fact there is every evidence that Froch, since the days of "The Real Class of whenever it was" on BBC has had a complete silver-spoon experience as a pro. He won every title he had in Nottingham, his home city. And at 31, his achievements are nothing like what Calzaghe's have been

I like Froch, although I think his remarks "slamming Calzaghe" after his announcement was a case of wrong time, wrong place, but come on. Why such a double standard, G0mez?

I think the biggest problem with Calzaghe was that he won his world title when the Super Middlewight Division was seriously lacking in character or competition. The division had enjoyed several glory years and was the fashionable weight for so many years. But once the main players either retired or faded away, the division became stagnant.
People criticise Joe for the "wilderness years" but seriously, can anyone name a career defining fight Joe could have had in that time that would cement his legacy?
Sure there are a couple of people he probably should have fought but is there anyone that would make Joe's harshest critics stop and think "yeah, if he'd have beat this guy Joe's legend status would be confirmed."
Lets have a look at who was around at the time that he didn't face.

1. A prime Bernard Hopkins. According to legend this was a fight Joe wanted but Hopkins didn't. I seem to remember Hopkins turning the fight down and choosing to stay at Middleweight. I could be wrong maybe someone could confirm? But lets be honest, who really gave a toss about Hopkins before his masterclass against Tarver? His best wins were against guys bloated up well beyond their prime weights (De La Hoya, Trinidad), his style is agonising to watch and his insomnia curing fights in defences against Robert Allen and Howard Eastman hardly made him prime choice. After he beat Tarver at LH he started to get recognition he deserved, plus Joe had just hammered Lacy. Suddenly it seemed a good fight to have. It happened within 2 years.

2. A prime Roy Jones Jnr. People slag off Calzaghe for not travelling, well Roy sure wasn't collecting many air miles in his career. But when Joe won his WBO title, Roy was already fighting at Light Heavy. Joe wasn't likely to move up a weight so soon after reaching title level at SM, and Roy was more than content fighting in his comfort zone and avoiding Darius like the plague. Roy seemed focused on eventually moving up to heavyweight, which he did, and then got sparked by Tarver (and then Johnson)

3. Sven Ottke. Ah good old Sven. Another who didn't travel. But yet only Joe gets slated for it. Talented no doubt, but so dull he could bore a glass eye to sleep. Maybe Joe should have gone to Germany and attempted to burst the bubble but I'm sure if Joe had knocked Sven clean out he'd have been disqualified for landing a clean punch. Sven had absolutely no interest in fighting Joe but again, it's all Joe's fault because he went on to have big success.

So they are the "big three" and two of those Joe went on to beat. One was obviously faded, the other proved he wasn't.
Who else didn't Joe fight? Liles, Thobela, Hilton, Catley, Beyer, Mundine. I can't think of anyone else, maybe Larsen?
Seriously, if Joe had fought any of these guys would you admit that he'd achieved all he could? I seriously doubt it, the division was pretty slim, I'm sure if Joe had collected all the titles people would only slate him for beating "easy" champions.
I personally think Reid, Woodhall, Starie, Sheika, Mitchell and Brewer were about the same level as the previously mentioned fighters.
I wont deny Joe fought some stinkers along the way, but a lot of these were annoying mandatories (Mger Mkrtchian, Veit, Salem, Ashira) and injury replacements (Pudwill).
Lacy was suppose to be the future of the division. Calzaghe had ruled a very dull and unfashionable weight category for years and Lacy was the first genuine prospect to come through who looked like he could deliver. We all know what happened next. Kessler was the next genuine contender. We all know what happened there too.
Joe was just a part of the wrong generation for the first few years of his title reign. It took years for the division to recover and when it did, Joe did pretty good defending his status as top fighter.

Well speaking from a British point of view, good riddance, Calzaghe was just a money making machine who fought champions past their best to inflate his record and make it look good, infact it does look good, but when you analize the fights its nothing more than has beens. There is maybe one fighter who was worth anything and that was Kessler.

Obviously the last 2 names on his record make him look like a real world champion, who has fought warriors but they were old men years past their best.

Then there was Manfredo who was a reality star made to look better than he really was.

Then you look down his record and see no names at all, Eubank was past it, Richie Woodhall wasn't that good.

I think in terms of value Calzaghe was no where near as good as Nigel Benn, Chris Eubanks, Herol Graham, Frank Bruno, and a long list of other British fighters, at least the British legends got into the ring with guys who you could say were not stiffs.

Bruno fought some good guys, yes proberly for money, e.g Tyson 2nd but he got into the ring with the baddest man on earth. Benn took on Iran Barkley which wasn't a fore gone conclusion.

We have had some great British fights, calzaghe is proberly the richest out of boxing, but he never brought any excitement to the sport.

I would go watch Hamed v/s Ingle
Benn v/s Watson
Bruno v/s McCall
Graham v/s Jackson
Sibson v/s Hagler
Honeyghan v/s Curry

any day of the week.

Message to joe calzaghe.......... good riddence and enjoy your money from mugs not like me!

I think the fact is, no one wants 20 padded out ttile defences with Obfuscate Warren matchmaking. Us proles would just like to see the main fights without the padding.

ok - there are a few people i would like to respond.
Horse, on a post back to me you ridicule the fact that i and some others rated calzaghe number 1 p4p, asking what we knew about boxing which is quite insulting. I'm not going to lower myself to answer as in a post to gobbles later in the thread you admit that some poeple do have calzaghe as number 1? Very poor when you have to resort to petty insults just because someone disagrees with your opinion.
Also, jamesmcdonnell uses the mundine v ottke fight to highlight how fast and tricky sven was. Would that be the fight he won by KO after being outsped and outboxed by Mundine? Weird choice to prove that particular point mate.

mimmy123- Like I said in my post, Calzaghes record is hardly littered with high profile names because the weight division he fought in was was hardly sparkling once Benn and Collins retired, Eubank faded and Roy moved up etc.
You point out that when Calzaghe beat Hopkins it's just a faded name to boost his legacy but I think this is utter bollocks. Maybe you have a point regarding Roy Jones but not Hopkins. The fact is, before he beat Tarver, Hopkins was was only really recognised within boxing circles and that was for being dull. He stayed at Middleweight for years and clocked up several defences, just like Joe did at Super Middle! No one seems to put down Bernards achievements though do they?
Had Joe beaten Hopkins pre Tarver, Calzaghe would have been criticised for beating a bloated up middleweight who was an old man well past his best.
Then 2006 happened and both fighters rejuvenated their careers, Hopkins by outclassing Tarver, Calzaghe by hammering Lacy. Fast forward a year Hopkins had ouclassed Winky Wright, Calzaghe had beaten Kessler. It was the obvious fight to be made at the time and Joe took it and won. It was very close but I had Joe just scraping a win, which is no disgrace when you consider how Hopkins went on to hammer a prime Pavlik, and how he had previously outsmarted Wright and Tarver. You just cannot look good against Hopkins, even if you win, because Hopkins' style will make any fight a snorefest grappling contest.

Regarding Ottke-Mundine. I remember Mundine being clearly ahead in this fight and being well on the way to a wide points decision. In Germany too which shows how much Mundine was dominating the fight. Then Sven found a punch that sparked Mundine clean out. Says a lot about both fighters. Ottke being outboxed and outsped by a 10 fight novice, and the great Mundine being clocked cold by a man with a 17% ko record. Two points that I'm sure would have been mentioned had Joe beaten either

DaveyH wrote:I think the biggest problem with Calzaghe was that he won his world title when the Super Middlewight Division was seriously lacking in character or competition. The division had enjoyed several glory years and was the fashionable weight for so many years. But once the main players either retired or faded away, the division became stagnant.
People criticise Joe for the "wilderness years" but seriously, can anyone name a career defining fight Joe could have had in that time that would cement his legacy?
Sure there are a couple of people he probably should have fought but is there anyone that would make Joe's harshest critics stop and think "yeah, if he'd have beat this guy Joe's legend status would be confirmed."
Lets have a look at who was around at the time that he didn't face.

1. A prime Bernard Hopkins. According to legend this was a fight Joe wanted but Hopkins didn't. I seem to remember Hopkins turning the fight down and choosing to stay at Middleweight. I could be wrong maybe someone could confirm? But lets be honest, who really gave a toss about Hopkins before his masterclass against Tarver? His best wins were against guys bloated up well beyond their prime weights (De La Hoya, Trinidad), his style is agonising to watch and his insomnia curing fights in defences against Robert Allen and Howard Eastman hardly made him prime choice. After he beat Tarver at LH he started to get recognition he deserved, plus Joe had just hammered Lacy. Suddenly it seemed a good fight to have. It happened within 2 years.

2. A prime Roy Jones Jnr. People slag off Calzaghe for not travelling, well Roy sure wasn't collecting many air miles in his career. But when Joe won his WBO title, Roy was already fighting at Light Heavy. Joe wasn't likely to move up a weight so soon after reaching title level at SM, and Roy was more than content fighting in his comfort zone and avoiding Darius like the plague. Roy seemed focused on eventually moving up to heavyweight, which he did, and then got sparked by Tarver (and then Johnson)

3. Sven Ottke. Ah good old Sven. Another who didn't travel. But yet only Joe gets slated for it. Talented no doubt, but so dull he could bore a glass eye to sleep. Maybe Joe should have gone to Germany and attempted to burst the bubble but I'm sure if Joe had knocked Sven clean out he'd have been disqualified for landing a clean punch. Sven had absolutely no interest in fighting Joe but again, it's all Joe's fault because he went on to have big success.

So they are the "big three" and two of those Joe went on to beat. One was obviously faded, the other proved he wasn't.
Who else didn't Joe fight? Liles, Thobela, Hilton, Catley, Beyer, Mundine. I can't think of anyone else, maybe Larsen?
Seriously, if Joe had fought any of these guys would you admit that he'd achieved all he could? I seriously doubt it, the division was pretty slim, I'm sure if Joe had collected all the titles people would only slate him for beating "easy" champions.
I personally think Reid, Woodhall, Starie, Sheika, Mitchell and Brewer were about the same level as the previously mentioned fighters.
I wont deny Joe fought some stinkers along the way, but a lot of these were annoying mandatories (Mger Mkrtchian, Veit, Salem, Ashira) and injury replacements (Pudwill).
Lacy was suppose to be the future of the division. Calzaghe had ruled a very dull and unfashionable weight category for years and Lacy was the first genuine prospect to come through who looked like he could deliver. We all know what happened next. Kessler was the next genuine contender. We all know what happened there too.
Joe was just a part of the wrong generation for the first few years of his title reign. It took years for the division to recover and when it did, Joe did pretty good defending his status as top fighter.

Davey H.... can I just make two points to a decent post you have made.

1) I am all for clearing up the devision... thats why I can see you logic on the RJJ scenerio. I personally think Joe could have moved up earlier (e.g. 2000) but I agree essentially, had these two never clashed I don't think it would be a huge loss to his career.

However, I would swap Jones as a "big three" for Markus Beyer - who demolished Richie Woodhall and reigned (over the course of 3 reigns) for half of Joe's reign. Sure you can say well Joe beat his conqueror, which he did - But Markus was shot then, and had been lucky in his previous fights. Markus in his first reign as WBC champion vs Joe would have been tasty. A person who reigned for 5 years and had been in the top 5 for pretty much his entire reign, isn't just a name like Theobela or Larson - its a pretty big miss.

2) On Ottke - yes, you make valid points.... although I disagree with this bias that you get score a KO to get a draw. Ottke had about the same number of dodgy decisions as Joe was fortunate to receive. However, the main point of the matter is - this "joe is the bad guy, Ottke is the good guy business that the Calzaghe fans bring up, when those more critical of him mention Sven" - If I started a thread about Ottke being the best Super Middleweight ever and one of the greatest fighters of all time... I would be laughed at and probably hounded out of here. Calzaghe will make the IBHOF in 5 years time... Ottke probably will never get that. Hell, even ring Magazine changed their rules so they couldn't give Ottke the ring belt! So off course Ottke isn't the good guy in this - both are equally to blame, but both had different ambitions. Calzaghe preached about being the best in the world for years... Sven was contented driving his VV Polo and picking and poking his way to solid victories without really getting the attention of the "world" scene.

Okay, so maybe Ottke didn't want it, maybe Joe didn't want to go to Germany, maybe Ottke didn't want to go to the UK - Who cares... fact is Joe never fought his natural rival. Its happend with others - RJJ never fought Dariusz.... and if Jones remained a light heavyweight and continued not to fight DM - then greatness would have been a hard ask, even for him. So what did RJJ do - move up and win the heavyweight title, then move back down to win back his Light heavyweight belt... first man in history. and he won belts at 4 different weight devisions - now thats greatness.

Calzaghe missed his natural rival - and really compared to what RJJ did... fighting a coming out of retirment 43 year old ex middleweight and winning some so called Light Heavyweight championship (when do comebacking fighters get awarded belts I don't know without fighting) via a dodgy split decision. Pales really into comparison.

Sometimes you miss out on your natural rival, but greats find away to over come this by creating some sort of challenge - Joe's was okay, and thats why he is in the top 5/6 of UK's best ever - but among the elite band of even modern (his generation) greats - he is not. The fact it, it was such a challenge he was the big betting favourite.

Autobarn wrote:I think the fact is, no one wants 20 padded out ttile defences with Obfuscate Warren matchmaking. Us proles would just like to see the main fights without the padding.

The problem with this statement is just about every big name boxer can be accused of the same thing. The problem as I see it, as I've stated above, is that the talent pool available in Calzaghe's era was far inferior to the previous generation. There just wasn't a glut of big names at Super Middle at the start of Calzaghes reign as there was in the early 90s when the division was laden with world class fighters and big names. I think the likes of Eubank was pretty lucky that when he was at his best, there were guys like Watson, Benn and Collins around, who were the best available domestic fighters. Calzaghes best available domestic opposition were Reid, Starie and Woodhall and he beat all three. A lot of people forget that at the time of the fight Starie was tipped for big things, his career just never took off like it should have.
But for everyone who accuses Joe of fighting nobody but stiffs, lets see who else did similar but at a time when there were a hell of a lot more big names about. Not all mentioned are victories, just fights they took.

1. Joe Calzaghe.

The good- Reid, Sheika, Woodhall, Mitchell, Lacy, Hopkins, Kessler, Eubank, Brewer.
The bad- Pudwill, Ferreyra, McIntyre, Ashira, Salem, Mkrtchian, Sobot, Salem.
The missed- Ottke, Collins, Liles, Beyer, Thobela, maybe a prime Roy Jones.

2. Chris Eubank

The good- Benn (twice), Collins (twice), Watson (twice), Rocchigiani, Malinga? Calzaghe, Thompson.
The bad- Stretch, Jarvis, Essett, Holmes, Ferreyra, Godoy. Honourable mentions go to Schommer (beat absolutely nobody but stiffs prior to his controversial points loss), Close (claim to fame pre Eubank was beating the erratic Nardiello for Euro title, claim to fame after two controversial decisions against Eubank, erm nothing) and of course Sherry (beat no one good before Eubank, lost to anyone half decent after Eubank headbutted him)
The missed- Roy Jones, Nunn, Toney, McCallum, Jackson, Graham, Kalambay

3. Nigel Benn

The good- Eubank (twice), Watson, McClellan, Piper, Barkley, Malinga (twice), Collins(twice)
The bad- Sims, Milo, Morgan, Lescano, Sherry, Gent, Ferreyra, Perez
The missed- Roy Jones, Nunn, Toney, McCallum, Jackson, Graham, Kalambay

4. Roy Jones Junior

The good- Toney, Hopkins, Griffin (twice), Hill, Malinga, Ruiz, Tarver (3 times), Harding, Calzaghe
The bad- Chirino, Garcia, Byrd, Sosa, Brannon, Frazier, Telesco, Kelly.
The missed- Eubank, Benn, Collins, Michalczewski, Nunn, prime McCallum, Rocchigianni, Tiozzo.

Just a few examples and don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Eubank, Benn and Jones and they were part of the reason I got into boxing in the first place. All fought at a time where Middle and Super Middle were electric, but they all missed out on some awesome fights and padded their records in between with some real stiffs!
Calzaghe did the same but at a time when there were less big names to challenge, but he still took on some of the best that were available at the time and when the division started producing some better fighters, Calzaghe beat them.

Can everyone stop saying Sheika was any good.... Jesus. The guy wasn't in the top ten and just lost to Tony Booth FFS.

stujones wrote:

DaveyH wrote:I think the biggest problem with Calzaghe was that he won his world title when the Super Middlewight Division was seriously lacking in character or competition. The division had enjoyed several glory years and was the fashionable weight for so many years. But once the main players either retired or faded away, the division became stagnant.
People criticise Joe for the "wilderness years" but seriously, can anyone name a career defining fight Joe could have had in that time that would cement his legacy?
Sure there are a couple of people he probably should have fought but is there anyone that would make Joe's harshest critics stop and think "yeah, if he'd have beat this guy Joe's legend status would be confirmed."
Lets have a look at who was around at the time that he didn't face.

1. A prime Bernard Hopkins. According to legend this was a fight Joe wanted but Hopkins didn't. I seem to remember Hopkins turning the fight down and choosing to stay at Middleweight. I could be wrong maybe someone could confirm? But lets be honest, who really gave a toss about Hopkins before his masterclass against Tarver? His best wins were against guys bloated up well beyond their prime weights (De La Hoya, Trinidad), his style is agonising to watch and his insomnia curing fights in defences against Robert Allen and Howard Eastman hardly made him prime choice. After he beat Tarver at LH he started to get recognition he deserved, plus Joe had just hammered Lacy. Suddenly it seemed a good fight to have. It happened within 2 years.

2. A prime Roy Jones Jnr. People slag off Calzaghe for not travelling, well Roy sure wasn't collecting many air miles in his career. But when Joe won his WBO title, Roy was already fighting at Light Heavy. Joe wasn't likely to move up a weight so soon after reaching title level at SM, and Roy was more than content fighting in his comfort zone and avoiding Darius like the plague. Roy seemed focused on eventually moving up to heavyweight, which he did, and then got sparked by Tarver (and then Johnson)

3. Sven Ottke. Ah good old Sven. Another who didn't travel. But yet only Joe gets slated for it. Talented no doubt, but so dull he could bore a glass eye to sleep. Maybe Joe should have gone to Germany and attempted to burst the bubble but I'm sure if Joe had knocked Sven clean out he'd have been disqualified for landing a clean punch. Sven had absolutely no interest in fighting Joe but again, it's all Joe's fault because he went on to have big success.

So they are the "big three" and two of those Joe went on to beat. One was obviously faded, the other proved he wasn't.
Who else didn't Joe fight? Liles, Thobela, Hilton, Catley, Beyer, Mundine. I can't think of anyone else, maybe Larsen?
Seriously, if Joe had fought any of these guys would you admit that he'd achieved all he could? I seriously doubt it, the division was pretty slim, I'm sure if Joe had collected all the titles people would only slate him for beating "easy" champions.
I personally think Reid, Woodhall, Starie, Sheika, Mitchell and Brewer were about the same level as the previously mentioned fighters.
I wont deny Joe fought some stinkers along the way, but a lot of these were annoying mandatories (Mger Mkrtchian, Veit, Salem, Ashira) and injury replacements (Pudwill).
Lacy was suppose to be the future of the division. Calzaghe had ruled a very dull and unfashionable weight category for years and Lacy was the first genuine prospect to come through who looked like he could deliver. We all know what happened next. Kessler was the next genuine contender. We all know what happened there too.
Joe was just a part of the wrong generation for the first few years of his title reign. It took years for the division to recover and when it did, Joe did pretty good defending his status as top fighter.

Davey H.... can I just make two points to a decent post you have made.

1) I am all for clearing up the devision... thats why I can see you logic on the RJJ scenerio. I personally think Joe could have moved up earlier (e.g. 2000) but I agree essentially, had these two never clashed I don't think it would be a huge loss to his career.

However, I would swap Jones as a "big three" for Markus Beyer - who demolished Richie Woodhall and reigned (over the course of 3 reigns) for half of Joe's reign. Sure you can say well Joe beat his conqueror, which he did - But Markus was shot then, and had been lucky in his previous fights. Markus in his first reign as WBC champion vs Joe would have been tasty. A person who reigned for 5 years and had been in the top 5 for pretty much his entire reign, isn't just a name like Theobela or Larson - its a pretty big miss.

2) On Ottke - yes, you make valid points.... although I disagree with this bias that you get score a KO to get a draw. Ottke had about the same number of dodgy decisions as Joe was fortunate to receive. However, the main point of the matter is - this "joe is the bad guy, Ottke is the good guy business that the Calzaghe fans bring up, when those more critical of him mention Sven" - If I started a thread about Ottke being the best Super Middleweight ever and one of the greatest fighters of all time... I would be laughed at and probably hounded out of here. Calzaghe will make the IBHOF in 5 years time... Ottke probably will never get that. Hell, even ring Magazine changed their rules so they couldn't give Ottke the ring belt! So off course Ottke isn't the good guy in this - both are equally to blame, but both had different ambitions. Calzaghe preached about being the best in the world for years... Sven was contented driving his VV Polo and picking and poking his way to solid victories without really getting the attention of the "world" scene.

Okay, so maybe Ottke didn't want it, maybe Joe didn't want to go to Germany, maybe Ottke didn't want to go to the UK - Who cares... fact is Joe never fought his natural rival. Its happend with others - RJJ never fought Dariusz.... and if Jones remained a light heavyweight and continued not to fight DM - then greatness would have been a hard ask, even for him. So what did RJJ do - move up and win the heavyweight title, then move back down to win back his Light heavyweight belt... first man in history. and he won belts at 4 different weight devisions - now thats greatness.

Calzaghe missed his natural rival - and really compared to what RJJ did... fighting a coming out of retirment 43 year old ex middleweight and winning some so called Light Heavyweight championship (when do comebacking fighters get awarded belts I don't know without fighting) via a dodgy split decision. Pales really into comparison.

Sometimes you miss out on your natural rival, but greats find away to over come this by creating some sort of challenge - Joe's was okay, and thats why he is in the top 5/6 of UK's best ever - but among the elite band of even modern (his generation) greats - he is not. The fact it, it was such a challenge he was the big betting favourite.

Fair points Stu, but let me address a couple of points you made.

1, Beyer beat Woodhall by close unanimous decision. It was by no means a demolition. True Woodhall was down 3 times within the first 3 rounds but he got up to fight on and the fact 2 of the judges scored the bout so closely shows that Beyer needed those knock downs for the points win.

2, If you started an Ottke is best SMW of all time, you probably would get laughed out of here. But if you had done the same regarding Calzaghe in 2005, I would have been one of them laughing at you. Calzaghes career stagnated at the start, I even admit that but he still beat some of the best that were available. Maybe you have a point about Beyer but he got knocked out by Catley shortly after beating Woodhall who then went on to lose to Thobela. I agree Joe should have probably fought Beyer and Ottke but I think if he did and beat both, people would still find fault.

The fact is Calzaghe rode the crest of a slim wave for several years, but he only started being mentioned as a "great" when he took on the new generation of talent to come through, before beating Hopkins who was still capable.

Ottke rode the crest of the same wave, fought similar opposition, scraped some bad decisions (I can only think of one really close decision with Calzaghe and that was Hopkins) and never left Germany. Then retired. Had he stuck around and beat Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins before Joe got to them then your joke thread about Ottke might be somewhat valid

stujones wrote:Can everyone stop saying Sheika was any good.... Jesus. The guy wasn't in the top ten and just lost to Tony Booth FFS.

At the time Calzaghe fought Sheika, he was a brash, loudmouth, hard hitting American who was destined for big things. Sure he'd lost to Tony Booth but he recovered enough to get back into contention. He beat Glen Johnson for example.

I'm not saying he was any good but at the time of the fight he was a prospect with big things expected of him. Turned out to be crap

EDIT- Removed Dan Sherry reference, it didn't make sense 8)

DaveyH wrote:

Fair points Stu, but let me address a couple of points you made.

1, Beyer beat Woodhall by close unanimous decision. It was by no means a demolition. True Woodhall was down 3 times within the first 3 rounds but he got up to fight on and the fact 2 of the judges scored the bout so closely shows that Beyer needed those knock downs for the points win.

2, If you started an Ottke is best SMW of all time, you probably would get laughed out of here. But if you had done the same regarding Calzaghe in 2005, I would have been one of them laughing at you. Calzaghes career stagnated at the start, I even admit that but he still beat some of the best that were available. Maybe you have a point about Beyer but he got knocked out by Catley shortly after beating Woodhall who then went on to lose to Thobela. I agree Joe should have probably fought Beyer and Ottke but I think if he did and beat both, people would still find fault.

The fact is Calzaghe rode the crest of a slim wave for several years, but he only started being mentioned as a "great" when he took on the new generation of talent to come through, before beating Hopkins who was still capable.

Ottke rode the crest of the same wave, fought similar opposition, scraped some bad decisions (I can only think of one really close decision with Calzaghe and that was Hopkins) and never left Germany. Then retired. Had he stuck around and beat Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins before Joe got to them then your joke thread about Ottke might be somewhat valid

I remember the Woodhall fight to be slightly different and I had it alot wider than the score cards. Yes, Woodhall closed the gap (including a huge round 12) but it was a clear defeat, not close - Woodhall knew he lost.

You have to remember that Ottke is a couple of years older than Joe - so him hanging around for Kessler and Lacy was going to be tougher. He did beat one of the "new generations" of champions in Mundine and a possible future champion in Larsen (I think scheduled to be challenging again soon), plus a guy who would later make peoples P4P top 10 lists (briefly) in Johnson. I think Lacy and Kessler came a little too late for Ottke.

The Reid fight (with Joe) was very close, I scored for Reid - and I personally scored the Kessler vs Calzaghe fight 6-6... I know I am on my own there, but I know of a fair few who scored it 7-5. Would have been nice for Joe to have rematched those close fights. Instead of fighting easier foe. Fair do's to Sven - the first fight with Brewer was close and the first fight with Tate ended controvesially - so he fought them both again, and beat them decisively. That is again something I feel greats need to do.

As for Sheika he was hyped - but it he was beaten by Booth... end of hype. Never really featured in the top 10 independently. If Khan fought Marquez now, would that be considered a decent challenge?

stujones wrote:

DaveyH wrote:

Fair points Stu, but let me address a couple of points you made.

1, Beyer beat Woodhall by close unanimous decision. It was by no means a demolition. True Woodhall was down 3 times within the first 3 rounds but he got up to fight on and the fact 2 of the judges scored the bout so closely shows that Beyer needed those knock downs for the points win.

2, If you started an Ottke is best SMW of all time, you probably would get laughed out of here. But if you had done the same regarding Calzaghe in 2005, I would have been one of them laughing at you. Calzaghes career stagnated at the start, I even admit that but he still beat some of the best that were available. Maybe you have a point about Beyer but he got knocked out by Catley shortly after beating Woodhall who then went on to lose to Thobela. I agree Joe should have probably fought Beyer and Ottke but I think if he did and beat both, people would still find fault.

The fact is Calzaghe rode the crest of a slim wave for several years, but he only started being mentioned as a "great" when he took on the new generation of talent to come through, before beating Hopkins who was still capable.

Ottke rode the crest of the same wave, fought similar opposition, scraped some bad decisions (I can only think of one really close decision with Calzaghe and that was Hopkins) and never left Germany. Then retired. Had he stuck around and beat Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins before Joe got to them then your joke thread about Ottke might be somewhat valid

I remember the Woodhall fight to be slightly different and I had it alot wider than the score cards. Yes, Woodhall closed the gap (including a huge round 12) but it was a clear defeat, not close - Woodhall knew he lost.

You have to remember that Ottke is a couple of years older than Joe - so him hanging around for Kessler and Lacy was going to be tougher. He did beat one of the "new generations" of champions in Mundine and a possible future champion in Larsen (I think scheduled to be challenging again soon), plus a guy who would later make peoples P4P top 10 lists (briefly) in Johnson. I think Lacy and Kessler came a little too late for Ottke.

The Reid fight (with Joe) was very close, I scored for Reid - and I personally scored the Kessler vs Calzaghe fight 6-6... I know I am on my own there, but I know of a fair few who scored it 7-5. Would have been nice for Joe to have rematched those close fights. Instead of fighting easier foe. Fair do's to Sven - the first fight with Brewer was close and the first fight with Tate ended controvesially - so he fought them both again, and beat them decisively. That is again something I feel greats need to do.

As for Sheika he was hyped - but it he was beaten by Booth... end of hype. Never really featured in the top 10 independently. If Khan fought Marquez now, would that be considered a decent challenge?

Reid knew he lost. He said so in the post-fight interview.

Just as Kessler knew he lost, as he said in the post fight interview and laughed off any of the media speculation about him having a hand injury.

Both good close fights, but Joe won them both

Of course Davey H, every fighter is managed to go in a particular direction, with calculated risks and away from certain threats. But David Haye has heralded more of a gung-ho approach - going for the jugular, refusing to be denied the prize, calculated gamble - and we may be seeing this in Froch as well and hopefully John Murray if this Prescott fight ever happens.

Oh and your points regarding Ottke's age, it was a hypothetical comparison. The point was that Ottke never fought anyone better than what Calzaghe did during the "wilderness years." Which is why Ottke is never talked about as a great.

Regarding Mundine, he was a 10 fight novice who was widely winning the fight until he walked onto a big shot. Like I said earlier, speaks volumes about Mundines punch resistance and doesn't say a lot of good for Sven to be losing to a man with 10 fights on his record.

G0mez wrote:Calzaghe was a decent operator with a cleverly managed career.

However his shoe-shining punches, bum wiggling and "nobody will fight me" that turned into the "He dont deserve to fight me" attitude put me off him.

And his blatant Hatton coat tailing was a joke. Especially when he slated his Kostya victory and also when Hatton left Warren.

He's two faced in everything he does or says.

One thing you could never accuse Carl Froch of being !

On one hand we had Calzaghe win his WBOgus title on the undercard of a Naz fight, who then defended it against 19-11 Branko Sobot....

Then we have Froch fighting unbeaten Pascal in a domestic FOTY candidate and then is gonna take short money and fly to former Olympian and former WBC,WBA,WBO,IBF middleweight Taylor's back yard for his first ever defence - and is already talking about Bute then Kessler immediately after !

I hope the Cobra pulls it off - as his attitude is bloody refreshing compared to certain other spoon-fed, blinged up media whores who masquerade as boxers, yet only pick on spent or smaller opposition in their own back yards.

Froch has fought several one sided fights. Like Calzaghe he has had to fight who was available. Joe has proved he could beat whoever was put in front of him and retire undefeated, while Froch is still a long way from doing that. Time will tell with Froch, its far too early to compare him with Calzaghe. If he can get wins over Taylor, Bute and Kessler that would be another matter but I dont think he will achieve that. I agree Froch has a willingness to fight the best and full credit to him for that but lets see if he can do the business. The best guys wont fall over like some of his earlier opponents so he will have to win the rounds. Taylor is no bum and it wont be an easy night for Froch but its fight Froch could win. Bute is probably too much for Froch and Kessler definately is.

Autobarn wrote:Of course Davey H, every fighter is managed to go in a particular direction, with calculated risks and away from certain threats. But David Haye has heralded more of a gung-ho approach - going for the jugular, refusing to be denied the prize, calculated gamble - and we may be seeing this in Froch as well and hopefully John Murray if this Prescott fight ever happens.

Yes but just because a newer generation of fighters are finally doing it right, does not mean you can discredit a fighter from a previous era. My point was people pick on Calzaghe for the way his career panned initially out but neglect to mention all the dross that padded out Eubanks record etc. Plus the fights Eubank dodged were far worse than the ones Joe dodged. But Eubank is (rightly) regarded as a legend, because we focus on what he achieved. We should at least give Joe the same courtesy but all people seem to care about is that he he fought a few stiff mandatories.