BoxRec

rhino222 wrote:

thepocketrocket wrote:No Rhino, To say Pacman was past it when he fought Hatton is actually amusing when you consider his career post Hatton.

I still disagree, would like you to justify to me when pacman got any better than he was in 2006-2009 when he stopped MAb and Morales twice!!

since hatton there are decent results, but against fighters passed their best, perhaps cotto being the exception to the rule.

I believe the fights up in weight were more competetive than his fights against a fading MAB and Morales. Personal opinion.

But no-one can deny pac has been one of the two best fighters on the planet for the period post Hatton, whether I am correct or not

Finn wrote:

hitman_hatton1 wrote:to say calzaghe avoided fights is not true.

he didn't do his all to seek em out is a valid criticism.

he was loyal to FW cos he got him a title and paydays.

but he should have been more ruthless when his career started stalling.

in saying that he'll be a 1st ballot hall of famer next year.

Well to be fair he tried to fight a prime hopkins but hopkins pulled out the day of the signing, that could have defined Calzaghes career. You still have to look at the manner he beat people. he completely humiliated Lacy, well beat Eubank (all be it past his prime), outclassed Kessler, and beat hopkins who then went on the beat pavlik and pascal albeit hopkins completely spoiled cheated and had cortez helping him out.

Ottke wouldnt get in the ring with calzaghe and RJJ clearly said he wasnt interested all risk no gain from his point of view and i can see his point. Beyer would have probably been the other option. Other than that there werent alot of people for calzaghe to fight.

I would have loved to see Calzaghe in with Green or Mundine while they were at super-middleweight

thepocketrocket wrote:

rhino222 wrote:

thepocketrocket wrote:No Rhino, To say Pacman was past it when he fought Hatton is actually amusing when you consider his career post Hatton.

I still disagree, would like you to justify to me when pacman got any better than he was in 2006-2009 when he stopped MAb and Morales twice!!

since hatton there are decent results, but against fighters passed their best, perhaps cotto being the exception to the rule.

I believe the fights up in weight were more competetive than his fights against a fading MAB and Morales. Personal opinion.

But no-one can deny pac has been one of the two best fighters on the planet for the period post Hatton, whether I am correct or not

here here.

hitman_hatton1 wrote:to say calzaghe avoided fights is not true.

he didn't do his all to seek em out is a valid criticism.

he was loyal to FW cos he got him a title and paydays.

but he should have been more ruthless when his career started stalling.

in saying that he'll be a 1st ballot hall of famer next year.

bulshitt he ducked ottke and he ducked johnson.

fasteddie wrote:

Newport Daz wrote:I have the greatest respect for Ricky's career. He dared to be great but was found wanting at the absolute elite level. Nothing wrong with that. He went as far as his talent would allow him, as good as Joe was, he can't say the same thing.

joe didnt even fight the best in britain at their peak either,he fought a less than best eubank and fought a robin reid in a fight i thought reid won and didnt give him a rematch but gave mario veit a remacth after stopping him in 7 rounds then 4 rounds or the other way round. ricky did fight the best at his peak but take away floyd and pacman and would you say he fought the best in his division? i would say no,cotto was there as was zab judah both would of gave ricky a hard time,he beat tszyu who had been out of action for close to a year with a bad back and suddenly he was the best 140lber in the world? he was struggling against carlos mousar before he knocked him out got beat by collazo but got the decision and struggled against urango,beat an old lightweight in castillo and called out the best fighter on the planet. ricky was a good fighter and took a chance can joe say the same?? id say no,joe was a better boxer but ricky wasnt scared to jump in with the big boys.

Theres a certain name on Rickys CV thats missing at british level too. I have to agree with most on here, hattons career seemed, at the time, more rip-roaring and exciting, perhaps his style led to that. Calzaghes less so although he was undoubtedly the better fighter (in my eyes). When Hatton was good he was very good, but he struggled with some B-Level fighters, Joe rarely did - Bika, maybe.

I'll probably get some stick on here but p4p i think Joe wouldve beat ricky not too unlike he did Lacy.

rhino222 wrote:

thepocketrocket wrote:No Rhino, To say Pacman was past it when he fought Hatton is actually amusing when you consider his career post Hatton.

I still disagree, would like you to justify to me when pacman got any better than he was in 2006-2009 when he stopped MAb and Morales twice!!

since hatton there are decent results, but against fighters passed their best, perhaps cotto being the exception to the rule.

But thats the way with "P4P" names isn't it - by the time people acclaim them as the greatest they are slightly over the hill and only fight other slightly over the hill "great" fighters.

Do people think a prime Calzaghe would beat Ward? I do, i almost wish he would come out of retirement, thankfully we have froch who is in an era with some great competition and is willing to get in the ring with anyone and war it out, flying the flag for Britain.

Finn wrote:Do people thing a prime Calzaghe would beat Ward? I do, i almost wish he would come out of retirement, thankfully we have froch who is in an era with some great competition and is willing to get in the ring with anyone a war it out, flying the flag for Britain.

Hard hard hard fight to call.
It wouldnt be a great tear up, but it would be one of the most interesting fights of the last 20 years.


Ward by SD, better defence wins it.

There wasn't great competitiion for Joe, but some of his opponents could have been a lot better.

the likes of Ottke, Beyer, Echols, Clinton Woods, Johnson, Eastman as well as Jones (peak), Hopkins (peak) and Toney should have been on his resume instead of the likes of Ashira, Bika etc.

I'm not saying he was too blame for the Ottke and Hopkins (peak) fight not transpiring, but there were others - even though some were no better than the other best wins of his career there would have been a culmative effect of good fighter after good fighter. Instad of the likes of Veit twice, Thornberry, Mr No Vowels, Pudwill etc.

Seeing how Johnson's career did pan out - what a fight that would have been. Glencoffe wouldn't have stopped chasing. It would have been a real test of character for Joe.

J wrote:

hitman_hatton1 wrote:to say calzaghe avoided fights is not true.

he didn't do his all to seek em out is a valid criticism.

he was loyal to FW cos he got him a title and paydays.

but he should have been more ruthless when his career started stalling.

in saying that he'll be a 1st ballot hall of famer next year.

bulshitt he ducked ottke and he ducked johnson.

got injured for johnson.

another one who believes ottke ever wanted that fight.

he retired without seeking it out.

that shows all u need to know. :>

he pulled out of johnson twice mate

johnson got pissed off with being messed around in the end.

i was at the press conf covering it for the bbn in baker street first time was supposed to be a hatton calzaghe double header.

jc was not interested in fighting GJ.

and ottke wanted the fight as much as JC did with his fear of flying.

what a fuckin load of bullshit that turned out to be. THAT tells you all you need to know.

lets not revise history here.

I doubt Ottke would have come to the Uk to fight Calzaghe, just the same as Joe was right not to go there.

I give Hatton a little more credit for his career too - he went to the US and took on two HUGE opponents, two of the best from the modern era, pretty much at their peak. Also proved it across several weight classes.

Kessler is a world class Super-Middle is all. Jones & Hopkins not at their peaks. The win over Lacy was beautiful, the skills Calzaghe was able to display that night were jaw dropping. But none of them remotely compare to what Hatton did taking on Mayweather & Pacquio.

I'm not knocking Joe, he had a great career too, I just admire Hatton for going for it that little bit more even if the adventure was to end in defeat.

That 46-0 basically changed boxing forever - thank God. The 'perfect' career.

I think calzaghe maybe doubted himself until the lacy win, but by then alot of the big fights werent available. One thing is for sure RJJ and calzaghe wanted nothing to do with each other. I remember and interview with RJJ in the UK when they were asking him why he was ducking Calzaghe (which i dont believe was the case) and jones said he's to big and calzaghe was a wonderful boxer but he doesnt bring anything to the table etc etc.

The hopkins fight only happened because hopkins was running out of opponents and had an argument with calzaghe at the hattons v PBF fight. Calzaghe should have maybe targeted pavlik and pascal after he beat hopkins because those wins by hopkins really cemented his legendary status.

hatton fought 3 of the best p4p fighters on the planet and beat one of them - that to me says it all he was willing to fight the best and not only that managed to cause an upset. Hattons career is under rated by the hardcore boxing fans imo.

Finn wrote:. Calzaghe should have maybe targeted pavlik and pascal after he beat hopkins because those wins by hopkins really cemented his legendary status.

I agree with everything you wrote but I think if Joe had taken those fights and won he would still be discredited by many. IE Pavlik was never that good, Froch beat Pascal anyway etc that type of thing.

Rest of post not aimed at Finn but the thread. Hatton had balls taking on Floyd and Pac for sure but he lost to both convincingly. I can't really put him over Calz career wise just because he had the balls to take those fights. He avoided many as well, throughout 90% of his career when he was at WBU/supposed world level by Warren.

Joe's career was a pain in the arse at the time too, and I do believe that some of the biggest fights never came of because of him. To bring someone like Ottke who was a coward into the equation is insane though. RJJ has more 'ducks' on his record that Joe too. Neither wanted that one imo.

Froch 's career when it is done should succeed both. Doubt it will in many historians eyes but his bravery in matchmaking should be a legacy that every World class level British fighter and promoter should study for generations to come.

stujones wrote:There wasn't great competitiion for Joe, but some of his opponents could have been a lot better.

the likes of Ottke, Beyer, Echols, Clinton Woods, Johnson, Eastman as well as Jones (peak), Hopkins (peak) and Toney should have been on his resume instead of the likes of Ashira, Bika etc.
.

Silly thing is stu joe beats almost all of them handily on his day

Ottke - only joe (and sven) know why this wasnt made. Joe wins
Beyer - joe wins
Echols - joe wins
Clinton - offered a million to fight joe, but "team woods" turned it down as they had title and thought theyd get more elsewhere. As a side when woods fought johnson he was the away fighter on sports network card and his dressing room was the disabled bog. Allegedly. Joe wins.
Eastman - when would this have been relevant? Joe wins anyway.
Only problem with Jones and Hopkins peak are that joe wasnt at his peak when they were, really. Hopkins fight shouldve happened earlier than it did (although look what hopkins did to pavlik after to see he was still very very good). Jones left SMW in '96, jones didnt beat eubank till 97. Argument can be made he couldve moved up around 2003, but jones jnr was fighting ruiz in 2003.