Britain's greatest ever champion

[dr_devious]

Jimmy Wilde is the greatest ever British fighter. Lennox and Joe are probably the greatest world champions in terms of longevity, also depends on whether you count Bob Fitzsimmons as British

[Datsue]

Ken Buchanan fought more live, elite-level fighters than Joe Calzaghe's long, drawn out WBO nothing run at super middle.

The system of rating men highly because they held one of innumerable belts that didn't exist in the old days is flawed in the extreme. If Randy Turpin or John Conteh or Ken B could win a WBO belt, stay at home and pick whoever they choose to fight they would have likely never lost.

[ttornado]

I'm all for avenging losses, it doesn't exactly erase them however.

That's why I said it some part negates them and not it erases them

[ttornado]

and are you really going to try and tell us that McCall was 100% in the rematch?
If you're going to try and use that argument remember it goes both ways...

You're conflating my point, which was it's easier to avoid losses if you pull out of fights a lot.
Not saying Calzaghe should of fought when less than 100%, but it did help avoid a loss.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Ken Buchanan fought more live, elite-level fighters than Joe Calzaghe's long, drawn out WBO nothing run at super middle.

The system of rating men highly because they held one of innumerable belts that didn't exist in the old days is flawed in the extreme. If Randy Turpin or John Conteh or Ken B could win a WBO belt, stay at home and pick whoever they choose to fight they would have likely never lost.

Yes, very good point. However, it's hard to judge people on what they might have achieved. Back when turpin fought, fighter fought a hell of a lot more often, often at short notice, and so they would lose a few - it was a very different era to now, so very hard to compare.

Modern champs have the luxury of fighting a couple of times a year for massive paydays, something the likes of Ray Robinson could only have dreamt of.

[banjo]

In the old days a defeat was often seen as a bad day at the office rather than a major turning point in a fighters career.

[expe]

Best British fighter ever for me. Only Hopkins and Reid came close to beating him and I thought he won both of those by 4 or 5 rounds. As for the criticism of his opponents, I think it gets forgotten in all the jokes about Tocker Pudwill and Will Mcintyre, that he fought some quality fighters. Eubank, Reid, Woodhall, Brewer, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins and Jones Jr were world champions and Bika is now world champion. Even Juan Carlos Gimenez Ferreyra had been the distance with Eubank and Benn, Starie gave Ottke a decent fight, though that probably says more about the German and Mkrtchyan went on to be European champion. There's no excusing the likes of Sobot, Thornberry, Jimenez, Pudwill and Mcintyre, but he beat some top class fighters, I just wish Joe went to America earlier so there were no doubts about just how good he was. It's worth remembering as well that Hopkins agreed to fight him in 2002, then came back the next day, asked for double the money and was told to fornicate off.

[orbtastic]

Jimmy Wilde is the greatest ever British fighter. Lennox and Joe are probably the greatest world champions in terms of longevity, also depends on whether you count Bob Fitzsimmons as British

What's his best two wins?

[expe]

Jimmy Wilde is the greatest ever British fighter. Lennox and Joe are probably the greatest world champions in terms of longevity, also depends on whether you count Bob Fitzsimmons as British

What's his best two wins?

Have all these people ever seen any footage of him fighting?

[orbtastic]

I do find it baffling. I'm expecting someone to come on and say he fought bantamweights and featherweights whilst he weighed in wearing his suit and pit boots next.

[stevedoc]

Sure it didn't say greatest Welsh champion, his that for sure.
Lennox is the best British champion, in terms of competition.

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

[n1ebf]

Sure it didn't say greatest Welsh champion, his that for sure.
Lennox is the best British champion, in terms of competition.

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

I tend to agree with that. I wouldn't necessarily call McCall average or a journeyman, or even Rahman, I think both were dangerous fighters. However, if Brewer (?) and the other guy that chinned Joe early had punched like heavyweights, then Calzaghe might have had a couple of KO defeats too. As it was, he got up and stopped them in the next round.

[Trojans44]

Resurgent Welsh nationalism aside, I don't see how Calzaghe beating a couple of fortysomethings, Kessler & Lacey makes him the best Brit ever.

I mean, not unless Terry Downes beating the fortysomething SRR & winning the undisputed title against Paul Pender also ranks up there for you. If it does, cool, but it makes me think you're neurologically atypical.

Calzaghe was literally a handpicked stay-at-homer of a champ for years, fought against some Herbie Hide-level opposition, didn't fight his obvious rivals when it mattered & came out of his shell late on & proved he had the potential that his fanbase had always credited him with.

But he never had the fights when it mattered. You're kidding yourself if you think he had a properly "great" career, in the sense of the kind of career people will look back on & go "Oooh" & "AAaaah" at.

Ken Buchanan beat better fighters, nearer their primes, for more significant titles. He didn't hide in his home country & avoid fighting the best available for most of a decade.

Joe might've been a very very good fighter, but only nostalgic hindsight as anointed him as this ATG type figure, imo, & if it's bolstered by the "Oh he never got beaten..." bollocks, that's only relevant 'cos he never tested himself until it was almost too late & he thought he had nothing to lose.

Hatton had a more impressive championship run, FFS -- beat a better fighter for the title, won proper lineage, did as much cleaning up of the division to keep his position intact, & moved out of his comfort zone away from home to fight truly all-time great fighters in their primes.

I await with bated breath some schmuck going "Nyyaaah, but HAtton lost!" I don't even have to rebut that, because I know the same fellas saying it will, under almost any other circumstances, point out just how shallow & deceiving having a "0" in the L column can be.

Whatever & irrespective of their talent levels, some guys challenged themselves & went balls to the wall. Some--for whatever convoluted Byzantine reasons--seemed either quite happy not to or seemed to expend a lot of time & energy trying not to. This for me marks certain dudes out as "great champions" far more than their bloody W-L record indicates.

Oh yeah, & "Oh but XYZ slipped up along the way" is such a cretinous schoolyard argument I can barely be bothered to come back with "Joe Motherfucking Louis, pal". But I will.

"Joe Motherfucking Louis, Pal".

See?

Outstanding post, saved me the trouble. Particularly agree Hatton was the standout Uk fighter of the era. Even Khan has already had a more testing career than WBO Joe.

[ttornado]

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

avenged both though

[Tuan_Jim]

Sure it didn't say greatest Welsh champion, his that for sure.
Lennox is the best British champion, in terms of competition.

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

That's highly spurious. Calzaghe never boxed anyone as dangerous as Oliver MCall or Hasim Rahman. You'll do well to find a big puncher on his record, let alone one who was world ranked, in his prime and on a run.

I'm not defending Lewis or taking sides, Joe simply never took on anyone as dangerous as those men. Also, Lewis beat them both in rematches. What did Joe do in his rematches with Robin Reid and Bernard Hopkins?

[Datsue]

Sure it didn't say greatest Welsh champion, his that for sure.
Lennox is the best British champion, in terms of competition.

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

& Alexander Povetkin wasn't KO'd savagely by an old, faded former champion who had no hope of beating him. Which Joe Louis was.

So therefore Povetkin=>Louis, right?

In other news, the sea is not above the sky.

[stevedoc]

so oliver McCall the same fighter that got beaten by frank bruno was more dangerous than jeff lacey or chris eubanks to name a couple . and Rahman wasn't any better . ok top 10 guys but by no means were they fighters that should even trouble lewis .

[NazNaci1]

Resurgent Welsh nationalism aside, I don't see how Calzaghe beating a couple of fortysomethings, Kessler & Lacey makes him the best Brit ever.

I mean, not unless Terry Downes beating the fortysomething SRR & winning the undisputed title against Paul Pender also ranks up there for you. If it does, cool, but it makes me think you're neurologically atypical.

Calzaghe was literally a handpicked stay-at-homer of a champ for years, fought against some Herbie Hide-level opposition, didn't fight his obvious rivals when it mattered & came out of his shell late on & proved he had the potential that his fanbase had always credited him with.

But he never had the fights when it mattered. You're kidding yourself if you think he had a properly "great" career, in the sense of the kind of career people will look back on & go "Oooh" & "AAaaah" at.

Ken Buchanan beat better fighters, nearer their primes, for more significant titles. He didn't hide in his home country & avoid fighting the best available for most of a decade.

Joe might've been a very very good fighter, but only nostalgic hindsight as anointed him as this ATG type figure, imo, & if it's bolstered by the "Oh he never got beaten..." bollocks, that's only relevant 'cos he never tested himself until it was almost too late & he thought he had nothing to lose.

Hatton had a more impressive championship run, FFS -- beat a better fighter for the title, won proper lineage, did as much cleaning up of the division to keep his position intact, & moved out of his comfort zone away from home to fight truly all-time great fighters in their primes.

I await with bated breath some schmuck going "Nyyaaah, but HAtton lost!" I don't even have to rebut that, because I know the same fellas saying it will, under almost any other circumstances, point out just how shallow & deceiving having a "0" in the L column can be.

Whatever & irrespective of their talent levels, some guys challenged themselves & went balls to the wall. Some--for whatever convoluted Byzantine reasons--seemed either quite happy not to or seemed to expend a lot of time & energy trying not to. This for me marks certain dudes out as "great champions" far more than their bloody W-L record indicates.

Oh yeah, & "Oh but XYZ slipped up along the way" is such a cretinous schoolyard argument I can barely be bothered to come back with "Joe Motherfucking Louis, pal". But I will.

"Joe Motherfucking Louis, Pal".

See?

Superb post Worded far better than I ever could.

[Datsue]

so oliver McCall the same fighter that got beaten by frank bruno was more dangerous than jeff lacey or chris eubanks to name a couple . and Rahman wasn't any better . ok top 10 guys but by no means were they fighters that should even trouble lewis .

|But that's not what you said.

You said that 'cos Lewis lost to two fighters, his reign wasn't as worthy as Joe's. So, using your own logic, I pointed out that if you think that way it leads to crazy shit like saying Povetkin>Louis.

I used this rhetorical device in order to display that it's not just about "Oh this bloke lost a couple," because in something like boxing that shite don't really matter.

& I went to all this length because I know for a fact you're smart enough, well-versed enough in the game & knowledgeable enough about the sport to recognise the fallacies in your own argument.

[Tuan_Jim]

so oliver McCall the same fighter that got beaten by frank bruno was more dangerous than jeff lacey or chris eubanks to name a couple . and Rahman wasn't any better . ok top 10 guys but by no means were they fighters that should even trouble lewis .

If you can't see the difference between the Oliver McCall who boxed Lewis and the one who later boxed Bruno then really boxing might be too complex a subject for you.

And for the record, yes, the Oliver McCall who lost to Bruno was still way more competent than Jeff Lacy. McCall even when partied out & strung out still knew how to avoid an ass kicking, unlike Lacy.

[stevedoc]

so oliver McCall the same fighter that got beaten by frank bruno was more dangerous than jeff lacey or chris eubanks to name a couple . and Rahman wasn't any better . ok top 10 guys but by no means were they fighters that should even trouble lewis .

|But that's not what you said.

You said that 'cos Lewis lost to two fighters, his reign wasn't as worthy as Joe's. So, using your own logic, I pointed out that if you think that way it leads to crazy poo like saying Povetkin>Louis.

I used this rhetorical device in order to display that it's not just about "Oh this bloke lost a couple," because in something like boxing that shite don't really matter.

& I went to all this length because I know for a fact you're smart enough, well-versed enough in the game & knowledgeable enough about the sport to recognise the fallacies in your own argument.

i was using mccall and rahman to simply show that lennox lewis wasn't as complete as fighter as some think , very good but he was ko'd in his prime by a below par challenger in Rahman only 2/3 fights before he beat a shot tyson ,the mccall fight could be considered a fluke but for it to happen twice it shows a weakness in lewis's DNA . i'm not even a massive calzaghe fan but he came through anything he faced were as lewis failed at times and he was lucky that vitali cut up or he was about to lose again i think

[stevedoc]

so oliver McCall the same fighter that got beaten by frank bruno was more dangerous than jeff lacey or chris eubanks to name a couple . and Rahman wasn't any better . ok top 10 guys but by no means were they fighters that should even trouble lewis .

If you can't see the difference between the Oliver McCall who boxed Lewis and the one who later boxed Bruno then really boxing might be too complex a subject for you.

And for the record, yes, the Oliver McCall who lost to Bruno was still way more competent than Jeff Lacy. McCall even when partied out & strung out still knew how to avoid an ass kicking, unlike Lacy.

so can you remind me of ANYONE that mccall ever beat that was under 45 .mccall was a decent fighter but not a someone that should of ever held a belt. i can not understand how you can rate mccall....

[Datsue]

|But that's not what you said.

You said that 'cos Lewis lost to two fighters, his reign wasn't as worthy as Joe's. So, using your own logic, I pointed out that if you think that way it leads to crazy poo like saying Povetkin>Louis.

I used this rhetorical device in order to display that it's not just about "Oh this bloke lost a couple," because in something like boxing that shite don't really matter.

& I went to all this length because I know for a fact you're smart enough, well-versed enough in the game & knowledgeable enough about the sport to recognise the fallacies in your own argument.

i was using mccall and rahman to simply show that lennox lewis wasn't as complete as fighter as some think , very good but he was ko'd in his prime by a below par challenger in Rahman only 2/3 fights before he beat a shot tyson ,the mccall fight could be considered a fluke but for it to happen twice it shows a weakness in lewis's DNA . i'm not even a massive calzaghe fan but he came through anything he faced were as lewis failed at times and he was lucky that vitali cut up or he was about to lose again i think

Okay.

So, let's make it basic. You're saying Joe>Lennox because of Lennox's losses, right?

I think that argument & entire line of reasoning is utter bullshit, & can only reply with "Lennox's losses in this context do not matter, because for me & I imagined for you too, being a dyed-in-the-wool proper boxing bloke, I thought it was all about testing yourself against the best. You slip up along the way, you get the fvck back on the horse & beat those guys who beat you.

"Fight often enough, fight widely enough, you're gonna lose. Joe wasn't so fvcking good ever that he was literally unbeatable, he only retired with the pretty record because he filled time fighting against the Mrkchktktachckckahhhn's of this world & rarely actually faced a proper live body.

"I believe that Ken Buchanan--who I've been mentioning shitloads but people have chosen to ignore--has had one of the most impressive championship careers in British boxing history. He lost. His record is still more impressive than Joe's."

From this one can extrapolate that I value sportsmanlike challenge of one's abilities, courage & "I'll take on any pudendum in the room" well-'ardness as my measure of a champion. Success against those who present such a challenge is an integral part of this evaluation, of course, but on-paper results are of course tempered by circumstance.

From what you keep harping on about, it comes down to that you think not losing makes you great.

I think that's laughable. Otherwise that South Korean kiddy who won the title & defended it twice then retired at about 16-0 is a greater fighter than Marco Barrera, Erik Morales & Wilfredo Gomez.

Can you see where we're coming from on this? I wouldn't be going to all this trouble if you said "I think Joe's style & attributes blah blah blah" & then made an argument based on that. I'd disagree massively, but that's not my point.

You keep talking about his record. His record is hideously inflated, pumped full of silicone & wears too much makeup.

[expe]

Sure it didn't say greatest Welsh champion, his that for sure.
Lennox is the best British champion, in terms of competition.

calzaghe wasn't ko'd twice by average fighters like lewis was

That's highly spurious. Calzaghe never boxed anyone as dangerous as Oliver MCall or Hasim Rahman. You'll do well to find a big puncher on his record, let alone one who was world ranked, in his prime and on a run.

I'm not defending Lewis or taking sides, Joe simply never took on anyone as dangerous as those men. Also, Lewis beat them both in rematches. What did Joe do in his rematches with Robin Reid and Bernard Hopkins?

Jeff Lacy, that is all.

Funnily enough, Joe wasn't pasted by Reid or Hopkins inside 2 or 5 rounds, he beat both on points in close decisions.

[Tuan_Jim]

so can you remind me of ANYONE that mccall ever beat that was under 45 .mccall was a decent fighter but not a someone that should of ever held a belt. i can not understand how you can rate mccall....

Yes, Oliver McCall beat Lennox Lewis, Bruce Seldon, Francesco Damiani, lost a decision he should have been given vs Tony Tucker, Oleg Maskaev, Henry Akinwande.

Now tell me about Jeff Lacy's list of victims.