Page 2 of 2

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 05:28
by loaded_gloves
He'd already backed out of a fight with Vitali. His reputation wouldn't survive another backing out.

Also, you think rich people don't always want another 5 or 10 mil? come on.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 05:35
by mickey1975
Absolute bullshit! Nowhere near.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 06:28
by youngrell
I thought I'd read somewhere that Haye and Wlad both made around £21.6M each?

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 06:42
by DMA1987
MarkMcBurney wrote: You think multi-millionaire David Haye really needed the money at that point in his career?
Absolutely. You are a long time retired in Boxing (unless your name is Audley).

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 06:49
by mickey1975
youngrell wrote:I thought I'd read somewhere that Haye and Wlad both made around £21.6M each?
Maybe shared that much.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 06:55
by palooka
mickey1975 wrote:
youngrell wrote:I thought I'd read somewhere that Haye and Wlad both made around £21.6M each?
Maybe shared that much.
It must be nice to get half of a pie that big.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 07:07
by youngrell
mickey1975 wrote:
youngrell wrote:I thought I'd read somewhere that Haye and Wlad both made around £21.6M each?
Maybe shared that much.
Possibly. I think it was on a Forbes list or something similar for sports men, and Haye's earnings were around that mark and he only fought once during that year.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 12:15
by fightscorecollector
Joe sat on a title for years, his best wins are Kessler and Hopkins. Simply did not fight anywhere enough top levels guys especially when being a champ for 10 years.

Ive heard people say he would have gave Jones Jnr a good fight, i cant see it. Jones would win just about every round. Jones was a great fighter. Calzaghe wasnt because of his opposition

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 24 May 2013, 22:48
by Perseus
As it stands Joe seems to be an absolute lock to be inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame next year.

That zero in the loss column is very important for that though............his total body of work was such that a loss in either or both fights and he's probably not in the next hall of fame class.

Seriously, people want to heap huge credit on him for giving a 43 year old fighter his 3rd loss in 5 fights.
Since hitting the big 40 the win/lose record of that fighter is a whopping 8-4-1 with a no contest....................6 times in 14 fights he has failed to record a victory............a winning percentage barely over .500 and that is the win people want to say cements his legacy.
If that's a legacy making win then there isn't much of a legacy.
Sure Hopkins has scored some big wins over that time but it doesn't change the fact that he's winning just over half of his fights............if you're going to count the wins then you have to acknowledge the ones he didn't win too.
Go ahead and consider getting in the ring with him and not suffering a loss to be a big deal though.
No matter what happens tomorrow Kessler is the win I would be pointing out.

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 25 May 2013, 02:03
by Jeff Thomas
SNG wrote:
Jeff Thomas wrote: A great fighter for me, but only on consistency... I think head to head he wasn't as good as a prime Benn, Eubank, Jones Jnr or Toney.
I love Nigel Benn, he's one of my favourite fighters but prime for prime I don't see how he beats Calzaghe.
Watch him vs mclellon he was the full package

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 25 May 2013, 02:07
by polecateddy
Jeff Thomas wrote:
SNG wrote:
Jeff Thomas wrote: A great fighter for me, but only on consistency... I think head to head he wasn't as good as a prime Benn, Eubank, Jones Jnr or Toney.
I love Nigel Benn, he's one of my favourite fighters but prime for prime I don't see how he beats Calzaghe.
Watch him vs mclellon he was the full package
I don't think many serious pundits would pick Nigel to beat Joe! Lol

Re: If Calzaghe had gone 44-2, how would that impact his legacy?

Posted: 25 May 2013, 02:54
by Finn
MarkMcBurney wrote:
DMA1987 wrote:
MarkMcBurney wrote:
If Haye was genuinely coasting through the fight to lose on points, why wouldn't he just pull out with his injury in the run up to it?

Madness.
Is the answer not obviously money?
You think multi-millionaire David Haye really needed the money at that point in his career?

He'd make just as much money from an Audley/Chisora, if not more, than fighting a Klitschko in Germany.
i think he believed he would find a way to win injured or not, even being behind on points i think he thought wlad would make a mistake and be ko'd. He learnt the hard way - wlad doesnt make mistakes. If theres a rematch i think haye would be far more aggressive.

Also haye had already pulled out of fights with the klits, he couldnt pull out again.