BoxRec

ben geoghegan wrote:....... Not a goofy 0 at the end of the ledger. Ask Ji Won Kim, Ricardo Lopez or Sven Ottke.

Do not group Ricardo Lopez with any of these fighters. That includes Calzaghe.

Joe was a good fighter, no doubt. Alot of this B-Hop avoided JC or Jones wasnt interested, was alot of guff spread by Warren and his rabble, in order to keep his meal ticket in Cardiff and winning.

B-Hop wanted more money, Jones did not want to travel, given what had happened in Korea and JC SHOULD have stepped up and fought across the pond much, much earlier.

That said, he did ok for himself but he was always given the Aces, by Warren ie fighting Lacy in Cardiff, ditto Kessler and the fact he faced 2 mandatories in 10yrs is equally impressive, on the part of his promoter. Lets not understate these facts, either.

sg1985 wrote:

bjermaine wrote:

sg1985 wrote: Find yourself a source, it was nearly ten years ago.

since we don't need sources, calzaghe admitted in an interview a few years back that jones was the only fighter he felt he couldn't defeat. i remember reading it and it being quoted on other message boards but i don't have a source. this is part of the reason he chose to fight jones, instead of someone like dawson.

That makes absolutely no sense. He said he thought he'd lose to jones, so he chose not to fight Dawson? 2+2 = 4 not 5.

the interview was from around 10 yrs ago when both joe and roy were in their primes. this is the reason later on that joe chose to fight an old jones. he wanted roy's name on his resume instead going after one of the top fighters in the division in dawson.

sg1985 wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/3030004.stm

"A teleconference was set up in my office in New York for July 30th, 2002, and on the call was myself, Don King who was in the room, allegedly and Bernard Hopkins' lawyer, Arnold Joseph. Along with Arnold was a woman named Linda Carter, who was there on behalf of Bernard. We asked Arnold if Bernard wanted to fight Joe Calzaghe and we asked him how much money would he want if he did. The response we got was $3million and the fight would have to take place in the United States. After a little scratching of the head, we said 'Okay, done.' allegedly agreed on the spot, Don King agreed and we agreed so as far as we were concerned all parties were singing off the one hymm sheet. Arnold excused himself with Linda and I can only assume it was to call Bernard. Either that day or the next day, they came with a new demand: $6million, double the sum that had been agreed, the deal blew up.....he had then and still has no desire to fight Joe Calzaghe, that much is pretty clear.

Joe gets criticised sometimes for not having fought the big-name Americans, but in this case the fault has never rested with him."

- Jay Larkin, then Showtime TV Network's Senior Vice-President of Sports and Event Programming.

http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... 010&page=1

Well the fact that he ended his qoute with "he still has no desire to face Cal" which was proven to be false, makes me seriously question his objectivity. In any case, why not accept the higher offer . ..6 million to fight Hopkins after the Trinidad victory would've been a steal for Calzaghe. The profile he would've gotten if he'd beaten Bernard in 2003 rather than 2008 would've been twofold. Hopkins has never ducked anybody and it shows in his record.

"the interview was from around 10 yrs ago when both joe and roy were in their primes. this is the reason later on that joe chose to fight an old jones. he wanted roy's name on his resume instead going after one of the top fighters in the division in dawson." - BJerm

Likely true.

Calzaghe's, "fear of flying" line was also shown to be a complete farce when he travelled to meet wahsed-up iterations of Hopkins & Jones.

sg1985 wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

sg1985 wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/3030004.stm

"A teleconference was set up in my office in New York for July 30th, 2002, and on the call was myself, Don King who was in the room, allegedly and Bernard Hopkins' lawyer, Arnold Joseph. Along with Arnold was a woman named Linda Carter, who was there on behalf of Bernard. We asked Arnold if Bernard wanted to fight Joe Calzaghe and we asked him how much money would he want if he did. The response we got was $3million and the fight would have to take place in the United States. After a little scratching of the head, we said 'Okay, done.' allegedly agreed on the spot, Don King agreed and we agreed so as far as we were concerned all parties were singing off the one hymm sheet. Arnold excused himself with Linda and I can only assume it was to call Bernard. Either that day or the next day, they came with a new demand: $6million, double the sum that had been agreed, the deal blew up.....he had then and still has no desire to fight Joe Calzaghe, that much is pretty clear.

Joe gets criticised sometimes for not having fought the big-name Americans, but in this case the fault has never rested with him."

- Jay Larkin, then Showtime TV Network's Senior Vice-President of Sports and Event Programming.

http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... 010&page=1

Well the fact that he ended his qoute with "he still has no desire to face Cal" which was proven to be false, makes me seriously question his objectivity. In any case, why not accept the higher offer . ..6 million to fight Hopkins after the Trinidad victory would've been a steal for Calzaghe. The profile he would've gotten if he'd beaten Bernard in 2003 rather than 2008 would've been twofold. Hopkins has never ducked anybody and it shows in his record.

His objectivity is neither here nor there, he was in the meeting, you weren't. I don't think Hopkins ducked him, but he turned down an offer of 3 million asking for double. Take it as you like.

The fact that Calzaghe turned down the $6 million B-Hop demanded to me says he was the one doing the avoiding. Hopkins in 2003 was the one of the marquee stars of the sport, a fight with an undefeated 168 lb Calzaghe should have been more than $3 million.

sg1985 wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

sg1985 wrote: His objectivity is neither here nor there, he was in the meeting, you weren't. I don't think Hopkins ducked him, but he turned down an offer of 3 million asking for double. Take it as you like.

The fact that Calzaghe turned down the $6 million B-Hop demanded to me says he was the one doing the avoiding. Hopkins in 2003 was the one of the marquee stars of the sport, a fight with an undefeated 168 lb Calzaghe should have been more than $3 million.

Has Hopkins ever earned 6 million from a fight? What did he get for De La Hoya? Three million was fair and he knew it, and you know it. You question the head of Showitme's objectivity? Well at least now I know you don't have any. For one fighter to agree on a price and then ask for double is effectively pricing himself out of the fight and you know it, the fact your now trying to say in this situation it's Joe's fault is pathetic.

Wake up and smell the coffee buddy . . .Calzaghe was a Showtime fighter, Hopkins was HBO . . .so YES anyone could see the Showtime head would be giving a biased version of events in this scenario.

Oscar was $10 million plus PPV revenue.

mugabi wrote: Regardless to judge Joe you need to look at fights like the incredible passion filled night he destroyed the myth of Jeff Lacey,who forget what people think of him now, was built up as a beast before the fight.

I was as fed up as anybody with the direction of Joe's career and when the Lacy fight was announced, I was actually hoping Lacy would win, despite Joe being my compatriot, just so some new life could be breathed into the division. But as the fight neared, with SO MANY people overwhelmingly predicting a Lacy win (I think something like only one of more than 30 polled journalists at Seconds Out voted for JC), I couldn't help but root for the "underdog", which Calzaghe very much was, despite revisionist history.

.....Well,honestly I thought Joe Calzaghe had a good chin,great handspeed,a great sense of distance,good footwork,good combination puncher and great punch output,good punching power,and had that extra gear he could shift into whenever he needed(Like in the Kessler fight). Given all of those attributes though,he was not a great fighter because he did not prove himself to be great. He really helped legitimize that crappy WBO belt and now he is given credit for his 21 title defenses. Look at those title defenses and no matter how biased you are you can see that that reign is one of the least legitimate string of defenses ever. I don`t even mind that he struggled against a few of them either. Mikkel Kessler was indeed his best performance and Kessler indeed is quite a good fighter.Calzaghe looked very good in that fight.

His second best performance was probably the Lacy fight. Before this most of us thought he was a scared fighter with brittle hands,afraid to leave the comforts of home(I am sure some of us still believe this to be mostly true). He looked very good in that fight as well and that catapulted him into the mainstream in America but I thought Lacy was a way overhyped olympian who had no real good wins to that point. His other defining wins were against B-Hop and Jones jr. for wich he shouldn`t get too much credit for. He was good,not great. His legacy stinks to be honest and he could have fought the cream of the crop in the division instead of fighting Mitchell and fighters like that.

Jpreisser wrote:.....Well,honestly I thought Joe Calzaghe had a good chin,great handspeed,a great sense of distance,good footwork,good combination puncher and great punch output,good punching power,and had that extra gear he could shift into whenever he needed(Like in the Kessler fight). Given all of those attributes though,he was not a great fighter because he did not prove himself to be great. He really helped legitimize that crappy WBO belt and now he is given credit for his 21 title defenses. Look at those title defenses and no matter how biased you are you can see that that reign is one of the least legitimate string of defenses ever. I don`t even mind that he struggled against a few of them either. Mikkel Kessler was indeed his best performance and Kessler indeed is quite a good fighter.Calzaghe looked very good in that fight.

His second best performance was probably the Lacy fight. Before this most of us thought he was a scared fighter with brittle hands,afraid to leave the comforts of home(I am sure some of us still believe this to be mostly true). He looked very good in that fight as well and that catapulted him into the mainstream in America but I thought Lacy was a way overhyped olympian who had no real good wins to that point. His other defining wins were against B-Hop and Jones jr. for wich he shouldn`t get too much credit for. He was good,not great. His legacy stinks to be honest and he could have fought the cream of the crop in the division instead of fighting Mitchell and fighters like that.

great post. in calzaghe's defense, the string of 21 wbo title defenses can also be blamed on allegedly. it's a promoter's job to make money and when his fighter has a following along with a belt, it's easy to sit at home and collect paydays vs no-hopers. same is the case with ottke, dariusz, and erdei.

He struggled versus Bika. He of course wasn`t going to struggle that mightily against most of his opposition though because....frankly they weren`t that good. Thank you bjermaine,you are also spot-on in your assessment. He followed the path of alot of European fighters and it really hurt him. He had the potential to accomplish more but allowed Warren to direct his career. I am sure he made alot of money from it and that is fine,he is a prizefighter,but you can`t beat an aging Bernard Hopkins and a shot Roy Jones Jr. and act as if you have a Hall-of-Fame resume. I thought Ricky Hatton early in his career was going to do the same thing,defending that worthless WBU belt like 12 times or whatever it was. Atleast he had balls though,he fought Pacqauio and Mayweather.The two best fighters in the world for damn near 10 years.

sg1985 wrote:I wouldn't say he struggled against Bika, he won it quite clearly, but fighting Bika is never going to look spectacular. The only fight I remember he was really up against it was Reid, who some would argue Reid won it.

Is there a larger point you are trying to prove?

Now this is quite interesting one to call when you think about it. He was just too late in being around in the great golden age of British boxing in the late 1980s and early 1990s when he could have had some great fights against a peak Chris Eubank, Nigel Benn and Steve Collins, and although he beat Eubank to win the WBO belt, you can argue that it was a shopworn Eubank when you take into account the brutal wars he had against Benn and Collins, and he also did not fight a peak James Toney and Roy Jones as he was starting out in his career, and perhaps they may have regarded him as too much of a banana skin.

But he did have injury problems as he did injury his hands 5 times during his career though which we all know cost him a lucrative bout against Glen Johnson in the early part of the 2000s. But he took on the best as around at the time at Super Middleweight in Byron Mitchell, Mikkel Kessler and Jeff Lacy and beat them, defeated top British Super Middles in Robin Reid and Richie Woodall. And with the Lacy fight there were many American writers who said that Lacy was a fighter in decline and there for taking, but instead Calzaghe delivered one of the greatest performances seen in a British Boxing ring. With his footwork, blinding handspeed and high workrate style he dismantled Jeff Lacy, and it was only then he finally got the recognition that he deserved.

As for the attributes, The chin well he got dropped by Bernard Hopkins, Jones, Mitchell and Karbary Salem. But he got up of the canvas and showed a Champions heart in beating all four and stopping Mitchell. The workrate was exception he would throw probably somewhere between 720-900 punches a fight, he would use his footwork to hit his opponent from every angle you could imagine. So I do feel that his achievements are too easily criticised on here, as for me he is one of the best fighters that this country ever produced and I always enjoyed watching him fight.

sg1985 wrote:

Jpreisser wrote:

sg1985 wrote:I wouldn't say he struggled against Bika, he won it quite clearly, but fighting Bika is never going to look spectacular. The only fight I remember he was really up against it was Reid, who some would argue Reid won it.

Is there a larger point you are trying to prove?

No, not really. I just think he had an easy reign as a super middle weight champion. I mean that in a polite way, I'm not having a go at Joe, but he dominated as a champion at 168, no-one ever troubled him to my memory (aside Reid).

I believe you are right,it was a pretty easy reign. That says something about his skills but it also says something about the lack of desire or Warren`s tenativeness to match his fighters up against difficult opponents. He had the skills to compete with the best,no doubt,but he didn`t challenge himself the way he could have.

Not facing Sven Ottke was his downfall.

BoxBuzz wrote:Not facing Sven Ottke was his downfall.

Any wasn't not fighting Calzaghe Sven Ottke's downfall?

Jpreisser wrote:He had the skills to compete with the best,no doubt,but he didn`t challenge himself the way he could have.

Tell you what, feels like you could say that about any of the Euopean or American fighters since about 1990. Feels like only the Pac's and the Barrera's are willing to have a go at anyone.

Ezzard wrote:

Jpreisser wrote:He had the skills to compete with the best,no doubt,but he didn`t challenge himself the way he could have.

Tell you what, feels like you could say that about any of the Euopean or American fighters since about 1990. Feels like only the Pac's and the Barrera's are willing to have a go at anyone.

That`s why those fighters are loved by so many people. I agree that there have been many talented fighters recently who for some reason or another have not wanted to venture into deep waters. It sucks to be honest. One fighter that I had hopes for was Felix Sturm,right after the De La Hoye fight I was thinking that he had a bright future and was going to compete with the best. I absolutley adored that tight defense and stiff left jab. Lo and behold he stays in Europe and fights never to return. I am sure we all have had a couple fighters like that since the 90`s,ya know?