BoxRec

mickey1975 wrote:The best I have seen on tv is Conteh, the George Best if boxing, the best live was Calzaghe. And I have seen some fighters... Joe was exceptional.

Joe always found a way to win. Which is more than can be said about any other British boxer. He had off nights like all fighters but even on them nights he dug deep and found a way to win. He had speed, power ( not concussive but decent power), could box, brawl, granite chin, tough as an ox, unbelievable engine allowing him to throw 100 punches a round for 12 round. This why I think he's the most complete most naturally gifted British fight that there's ever been.

Joe used to hit like a horse but adapted his style due to hand problems, again it shows how good he was that he could do that.

Amir Khan has some remarkable natural assets, both physically and technically.

undone by a weak chin and a stubborness not to adapt to a style that will stop exposing his greatest weakness

but between his frightening handspeed, good power and attacking technique, he has to be up there as one of the most naturally gifted
if he had a better defence, perhaps a better attitude and a granite chin, he would have been a phenomenon

I also agree with the calzaghe shout, some of the flurries he threw, very few fighter have been able to get so many punches off from so many angles at the highest level. fantastic to watch.

Frankie Gavin
Kirkland Lang
Naz

Coco wrote:Joe used to hit like a horse but adapted his style due to hand problems, again it shows how good he was that he could do that.

Absolutely. A serious banger, even in the Amatuers.

mickey1975 wrote:

Coco wrote:Joe used to hit like a horse but adapted his style due to hand problems, again it shows how good he was that he could do that.

Absolutely. A serious banger, even in the Amatuers.

Yes; he beat a lot of very good boxers inside of 3 rounds.

Another very gifted boxer was Peter Culshaw.

All those mentioned, good shouts,what about Pat Barret?

Neville brown was a very good fighter in his prime

I think Frankie Gavin has got to be high up on this list. The boy is gifted

Michael Jennings is/was always a boxer I admired and enjoyed watching. He'll never be a legend but I enjoyed his movement.

newish boxers i like the look of lee selby he has good movement, power and speed... (even thou his last fight was a bit of damp squid he managed to get a win in an awkward fight).... best british boxer of all time though then it has to be joe closely followed by naz... mind you eubank is worth a bit of shout....

I think its a tough one cause some people have tremendous strengths, which is undone by some amazing weaknesses (e.g. Amir Khan).

I'm going to say a fighter not as a serious contender for the list, but is often on the top of the pile for "overachievers" (e.g. made the most of limited talent) and I for one completely disagree with that....


Steve Robinson.... always wondered what he would have been liked had he had the opportunities the likes of Amir Khan had. Great defensive qualities, great engine and rediculously underated hand speed. I would have loved to have seen what a Manny Steward would have done with him.

Another fighter with some seriously underated skills - Lloyd Honeyghun.

I know he seriously under-achieved as a pro, but what about Errol Christie?

Black Sam Bellamy wrote:Michael Jennings is/was always a boxer I admired and enjoyed watching. He'll never be a legend but I enjoyed his movement.

You'll struggle to find many fighters as fit as him, that's why he was able to keep up that movement for 12 rounds.

Peter Richardson seemed to have natural talent and boxing din't look to be difficult to him.

Newport Daz wrote:I know he seriously under-achieved as a pro, but what about Errol Christie?

i was just thinking of errol christie apparently he use to bash up tommy hearns in sparring at the kronk gym

mercman wrote:

Jeff Thomas wrote:I've trained with, sparred and fought with loads and out of everyone the two that stand out are Tony Doherty and Mathew Ellis.

People forget how good Matthew Ellis was when he was first coming through. He got a lot of stick for all that 'first billion dollar athlete' hype when he turned pro

I recall Scott Belshaw also getting the infamous 'first billion pound sportsman' hype from Maloney.

The Law wrote:

mercman wrote:

Jeff Thomas wrote:I've trained with, sparred and fought with loads and out of everyone the two that stand out are Tony Doherty and Mathew Ellis.

People forget how good Matthew Ellis was when he was first coming through. He got a lot of stick for all that 'first billion dollar athlete' hype when he turned pro

I recall Scott Belshaw also getting the infamous 'first billion pound sportsman' hype from Maloney.

Yes, but Mathew Ellis could actually fight

rio wrote: Joe always found a way to win. Which is more than can be said about any other British boxer. He had off nights like all fighters but even on them nights he dug deep and found a way to win.

And here is a line of logic that leads you to dismiss John Conteh for not finding a way to win versus Matthew Saad Muhammad, or Ken Buchanan for not finding a way to win versus Roberto Duran, while crediting Joe Calzaghe for finding a way to win over the mighty Kabery Salem, or a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins.

Utterly absurd.

loaded_gloves wrote:

rio wrote: Joe always found a way to win. Which is more than can be said about any other British boxer. He had off nights like all fighters but even on them nights he dug deep and found a way to win.

And here is a line of logic that leads you to dismiss John Conteh for not finding a way to win versus Matthew Saad Muhammad, or Ken Buchanan for not finding a way to win versus Roberto Duran, while crediting Joe Calzaghe for finding a way to win over the mighty Kabery Salem, or a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins.

Utterly absurd.

Pointing to Hopkins' age is absurd given what he has achieved since that fight.

Yes, since that fight he has outwitted the hapless Pascal and Cloud while losing comprehensively to Dawson. Increíble!

But well done for missing the point. Wilful blindness I believe it's called.

loaded_gloves wrote:Yes, since that fight he has outwitted the hapless Pascal and Cloud while losing comprehensively to Dawson. Increíble!

But well done for missing the point. Wilful blindness I believe it's called.

Wilful blindness?

I don't give a fornicate about your point, I just laugh when people point to Hopkins' age in the Calzaghe fight, the bloke is still a top ten pound for pound fighter now, and has since become a two time LHW champion at the age of 48, but his age was definitely detrimental five years ago despite his good wins since.

Yeah, okay.

If you think an athlete in his forties is anywhere near his best you are in deep denial. Secondly, if a 48 year old man with no punch and a wide loss to Chad Dawson is in the p4p top 10 that tells us all we need to know about the state of the sport.

loaded_gloves wrote:If you think an athlete in his forties is anywhere near his best you are in deep denial. Secondly, if a 48 year old man with no punch and a wide loss to Chad Dawson is in the p4p top 10 that tells us all we need to know about the state of the sport.

Tarver and Pavlik are amongst the best wins in his career all passed the age of forty.

Where did I say he was at his best in his forties?

Calzaghe with good hands would have been a scarily good fighter, even more than he already was