BoxRec

He didnt do himself no favors last night at all, he has gone down in my ratings, awful preformance imo.

KO Artist wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

For me Joe is up there now. Such a gifted fighter, prepares well, too.

How anyone can rate Lennox above Joe is beyond me. Lewis is not in Joe's league.

If Joe wins tonight (I have a nasty feeling about a clash of heads) and beats Kessler, Woods and maybe Jones, then retires undefeated, for me he would be the best of british, and one of the best ever regardless of nationality.

you wernt wrong KO

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

Joe's so open to the straight right hand, as shown last night yet again. Bika's corner knew it, to two round Bika focused on the straight right he won on most peoples card.

Andy Mac wrote:

c2ute wrote:Ridiculous is a bit over the top but I think only Lewis and Hamed have done better, Hatton is about on par at the mo, and JC has gone past Honeyghan, who have I forgotten now to make me look stupid?!

With all due respect i dont think you need to forget anyone, claiming that Calzaghe has surpassed Honeyghan is pretty silly as it is. Woodhall Ried Eubank and Lacy are not, nor ever will they be anything like the class of Don Curry. Coke or no Coke.

Interesting. You think Rene Jacquot is a better fighter than Joe Calzaghe? And will go down in history as more accomplished than Calzaghe?

sligobhoy67 wrote:

KO Artist wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

For me Joe is up there now. Such a gifted fighter, prepares well, too.

How anyone can rate Lennox above Joe is beyond me. Lewis is not in Joe's league.

If Joe wins tonight (I have a nasty feeling about a clash of heads) and beats Kessler, Woods and maybe Jones, then retires undefeated, for me he would be the best of british, and one of the best ever regardless of nationality.

you wernt wrong KO

Yep good call John

stujones wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

Joe's so open to the straight right hand, as shown last night yet again. Bika's corner knew it, to two round Bika focused on the straight right he won on most peoples card.

Well he's got his hands by his waist showboating half the time these days.

Calzaghe our best ever!!... come on!... havent you guys heard of Owen Moran, Ted Kid Lewis, Jim Driscoll, Jimmy Wilde, Jack Kid Berg, Benny Lynch etc... if the likes of Honeyghan and Conteh were fighting in todays diluted times they too would have ran up well over a dozen title wins!...

don't call it a comeback wrote:

Andy Mac wrote:

c2ute wrote:Ridiculous is a bit over the top but I think only Lewis and Hamed have done better, Hatton is about on par at the mo, and JC has gone past Honeyghan, who have I forgotten now to make me look stupid?!

With all due respect i dont think you need to forget anyone, claiming that Calzaghe has surpassed Honeyghan is pretty silly as it is. Woodhall Ried Eubank and Lacy are not, nor ever will they be anything like the class of Don Curry. Coke or no Coke.

Interesting. You think Rene Jacquot is a better fighter than Joe Calzaghe? And will go down in history as more accomplished than Calzaghe?

No, i would say Jacquot is about as good as Tocker Pudwill, or Mario Viet. I will stick to my original statement that Calzaghe has never beaten anyone as good as Curry was when Lloyd beat him. For that matter he has never beaten anyone in the calibre of Tszyu when Hatton beat him. Since you brought up people that beat Curry other than Lloyd, perhaps you could tell me an opponent that Calzaghe has faced in the same class as Mike McCallum before he was over 35?

Andy Mac wrote:Bowe threw his belt in a bin rather than fight Lennox, who had already stopped him as an amatuer. Tyson paid Lennox step aside money to defend against Holyfield. As for Holyfield himself, he would not have beaten Lennox at any time prime or no prime, just not big, strong, or skillful enough.

I agree Holyfield would never have beaten a focused Lewis.
But y'know Lennox often got lazy, and a prime Evander could've pushed him very, very hard in that situation.

Bowe vs. Lewis: .
As I heard it, Lennox didn't want Bowe initially - when Riddick was keen, then when he did change his mind, Bowe was suffering a breakdown.
I don't mean that the way it reads: I'd have put money on Lennox winning, but an emotionally prepared RB was the man needed to glorify Lewis's dominance.

Tyson of course was only at his prime - arguably - for about 18 months.

Its ridiculous to claim that Calzaghe shouldn't be considered alongside Honeyghan; beyond that one magical night, honeyghan was horribly inconsistent...calzaghe doesn't have a curry on his resume but he has a decent mix of titlists and ex-titlists and reasonable contenders, I think Calzaghe has proven himself the greater fighter than lloyd...

MightyWarrior wrote:

stujones wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

Joe's so open to the straight right hand, as shown last night yet again. Bika's corner knew it, to two round Bika focused on the straight right he won on most peoples card.

Well he's got his hands by his waist showboating half the time these days.

Even with his hands up, there is still a flaw. He didn't showboat vs Richie Woodhall, still shipped a fair few right hands.

He is exceptional don't get me wrong, but is straight lines.

Andy Mac wrote:

don't call it a comeback wrote:

Andy Mac wrote: With all due respect i dont think you need to forget anyone, claiming that Calzaghe has surpassed Honeyghan is pretty silly as it is. Woodhall Ried Eubank and Lacy are not, nor ever will they be anything like the class of Don Curry. Coke or no Coke.

Interesting. You think Rene Jacquot is a better fighter than Joe Calzaghe? And will go down in history as more accomplished than Calzaghe?

No, i would say Jacquot is about as good as Tocker Pudwill, or Mario Viet. I will stick to my original statement that Calzaghe has never beaten anyone as good as Curry was when Lloyd beat him. For that matter he has never beaten anyone in the calibre of Tszyu when Hatton beat him. Since you brought up people that beat Curry other than Lloyd, perhaps you could tell me an opponent that Calzaghe has faced in the same class as Mike McCallum before he was over 35?

we're comparing honeyghan and calzaghe - honeyghan never fought mccallum.

Honeyghans victory over curry was a tremendous achievement - but my point is that its a distinction shared by other men - including at least one in a similiar world title fight who will be nowhere near curry, calzaghe or honeyghan in the history books. In fact the decline of Curry is a genuine boxing tragedy of the era.

Honeyghan was a great fighter but in comparison to calzaghe his record as a world champ was fairly brief against some unremarkable fighters. And Calzaghe has certainly never lost to fighters such as Mark Breland or even Adrian Dodson.

Each to his own view but if you look carefully at the records of both men - and dont just rely on your memory of who honeyghan fought - you'll see that to claim that anyone who holds the view that Calzaghe has surpassed lloyd is "pretty silly" as you did is being a bit silly themselves.

don't call it a comeback wrote:

Andy Mac wrote:

don't call it a comeback wrote: Interesting. You think Rene Jacquot is a better fighter than Joe Calzaghe? And will go down in history as more accomplished than Calzaghe?

No, i would say Jacquot is about as good as Tocker Pudwill, or Mario Viet. I will stick to my original statement that Calzaghe has never beaten anyone as good as Curry was when Lloyd beat him. For that matter he has never beaten anyone in the calibre of Tszyu when Hatton beat him. Since you brought up people that beat Curry other than Lloyd, perhaps you could tell me an opponent that Calzaghe has faced in the same class as Mike McCallum before he was over 35?

we're comparing honeyghan and calzaghe - honeyghan never fought mccallum.

Honeyghans victory over curry was a tremendous achievement - but my point is that its a distinction shared by other men - including at least one in a similiar world title fight who will be nowhere near curry, calzaghe or honeyghan in the history books. In fact the decline of Curry is a genuine boxing tragedy of the era.

Honeyghan was a great fighter but in comparison to calzaghe his record as a world champ was fairly brief against some unremarkable fighters. And Calzaghe has certainly never lost to fighters such as Mark Breland or even Adrian Dodson.

Each to his own view but if you look carefully at the records of both men - and dont just rely on your memory of who honeyghan fought - you'll see that to claim that anyone who holds the view that Calzaghe has surpassed lloyd is "pretty silly" as you did is being a bit silly themselves.

Of course we all know honeyghan did not fight McCallum, my post did not infer that he had. The reality is that along with Hatton / Tszyu and Stracy / Napoles Honeyghan / Curry was one of the biggest upsets involving a British fighter ever. Calzaghe whether his fans like it or not has never faced a genuine p4p fighter like Curry was at the time. I also said that another Curry victor ( McCallum ) in anything like his prime is a better class of fighter than any opponent JC has fought, both in ability and standing. This is the main criticism levelled somewhat justifyably at Joe. I am not a Calzaghe hater, but the fact remains he has called out and defamed many big name fighters over the years, yet so far has always found a way of avoiding them.

I'm a big fan of Honeyghan but one big win isn't the be all and end all: Douglas KO'd Tyson, but you wont find him ranked too highly just on the back of that.
And if you look at the rest of Honey's title fights, they weren't that impressive - aging ex light welters & he then lost to an obscure Mexican no one had ever heard of - a 10-1 outsider to boot.

KO Artist wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

For me Joe is up there now. Such a gifted fighter, prepares well, too.

How anyone can rate Lennox above Joe is beyond me. Lewis is not in Joe's league.

If Joe wins tonight (I have a nasty feeling about a clash of heads) and beats Kessler, Woods and maybe Jones, then retires undefeated, for me he would be the best of british, and one of the best ever regardless of nationality.

Hmm, that's a bit of a crazy statement. Lewis not in Calzaghe's league? Based on what, talent, achievement, what precisely. Joe is a pretty talented guy, but he does have weaknesses for sure, and he's never fought a level of opposition to prove his greatness. We will probably never know how good Joe really was, as he will never face the competiotn which would put it beyond doubt. Fighting Hopkins for me won't really prove a lot, Hopkins is old, inactive, and was already beaten twice by Taylor, that he went on to beat Tarver is a great achievement, but says more about how weak the light heavyweight division is since Roy Jones deteriorated than anything else.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

KO Artist wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Yes in terms of quality of opposition I guess you can argue all night long, but in terms of all round ability I'd say Joe is right at the top.
There's no weakness in his game at all, none. Some say he doesn't punch hard enough, that he slaps, but you'd have a time convincing fighters like Eubank or Lacy of that supposed fault.

For me Joe is up there now. Such a gifted fighter, prepares well, too.

How anyone can rate Lennox above Joe is beyond me. Lewis is not in Joe's league.

If Joe wins tonight (I have a nasty feeling about a clash of heads) and beats Kessler, Woods and maybe Jones, then retires undefeated, for me he would be the best of british, and one of the best ever regardless of nationality.

Hmm, that's a bit of a crazy statement. Lewis not in Calzaghe's league? Based on what, talent, achievement, what precisely. Joe is a pretty talented guy, but he does have weaknesses for sure, and he's never fought a level of opposition to prove his greatness. We will probably never know how good Joe really was, as he will never face the competiotn which would put it beyond doubt. Fighting Hopkins for me won't really prove a lot, Hopkins is old, inactive, and was already beaten twice by Taylor, that he went on to beat Tarver is a great achievement, but says more about how weak the light heavyweight division is since Roy Jones deteriorated than anything else.

I think Hopkins would have had a harder night if he had faced Johnson again or if he faced Adamek, imperfetc and susceptible to the right hand as he is, rather than tarver who was and is on the way out, too tentative and inactive...

Greatest British fighter of all time, hasnt McGuigan heard of Jimmy Wilde, Benny Lynch, Freddy Welsh, Lennox Lewis, Ted Kid Lewis, Ken Buchanan to name but a few?
Jimmy Wilde is the consensus best flyweight of all time, and consensus top 10 lb4lb fighters of all time. The others are all consensus top 20 fighters of all time in their weight divisions, if not top 10.
How can Calzaghe claim to have this sort of legacy? Hes never beaten a great fighter, Jeff Lacy was probably the best hes beaten. Hes also struggled against the likes of Sakio Bika, Charlie Brewer, Robin Reid and David Starrie............does this make him the best British fighter of all time? Its difficult to say how he compares to the super middleweights of the previous era; Benn, Watson and Eubank let alone Jimmy Wilde etc

dr_devious wrote:Greatest British fighter of all time, hasnt McGuigan heard of Jimmy Wilde, Benny Lynch, Freddy Welsh, Lennox Lewis, Ted Kid Lewis, Ken Buchanan to name but a few?
Jimmy Wilde is the consensus best flyweight of all time, and consensus top 10 lb4lb fighters of all time. The others are all consensus top 20 fighters of all time in their weight divisions, if not top 10.
How can Calzaghe claim to have this sort of legacy? Hes never beaten a great fighter, Jeff Lacy was probably the best hes beaten. Hes also struggled against the likes of Sakio Bika, Charlie Brewer, Robin Reid and David Starrie............does this make him the best British fighter of all time? Its difficult to say how he compares to the super middleweights of the previous era; Benn, Watson and Eubank let alone Jimmy Wilde etc

Yes, McGuigan has heard of Wilde- he argued Wilde's case for being the greatest of all time (worldwide) in a TV programme a few years back.

I've always been a big fan of Barry but if he's said this then its a sad day as it seems he's sold out and is willing to spout any old nonsense in order to pick up his paycheck from ITV... I'd pick a peak Benn or Eubank over Calzaghe and prob Collins as well...

Well he did say "arguably" - and I don't think he's wrong there. I mean you couldn't really argue that Charlie Magri, for instance, was one of the best, but I think you could with Calzaghe.

I mean, how many people alive have actualy seen a Benny Lynch fight for instance?

MightyWarrior wrote:Well he did say "arguably" - and I don't think he's wrong there. I mean you couldn't really argue that Charlie Magri, for instance, was one of the best, but I think you could with Calzaghe.

I mean, how many people alive have actualy seen a Benny Lynch fight for instance?

How many have seen Harry Greb?... does that make Joe better than Greb too??... be real, who has jc actually beaten??... aside from a faded Eubank, Woodhall, Reid and terribly overrated Lacy, the answer is pratically noone.... to argue Calzaghe as an all timer is frankly outrageous...
If Hatton was on ITV Barry would be saying the same thing about him... no doubt he'll be saying it about Amir in a few years when Alir is on his 10th WBU 'title' defence... and some fools are going to be swallowing it!...

So in some instances you're basing your faith in old time reports and writers - some of these guys will tell you Marciano & Dempsey would've KO'd Ali inside a round. Who to believe?

I'd just rank Joe as one of the best UK fighters ever, and leave it at that.

Like Barry says, arguably - well that's what we're doing!

Thank Christ a lot of logical thinking going on in this thread.

If guys like Conteh and Buchanan et al had WBO titles & allowed to pick & choose opponents, they'd have super long "reigns".

JC is one of our best ever, but pure talent Buchanan, Conteh, Lewis and a couple of others are better.

Barry McGuigan is a total shill these days. I have no respect for anything he says at all anymore, he just isn't objective or even creditable. Very sad.

BRING BACK GARY MASON!!

MightyWarrior wrote:So in some instances you're basing your faith in old time reports and writers - some of these guys will tell you Marciano & Dempsey would've KO'd Ali inside a round. Who to believe?

I'd just rank Joe as one of the best UK fighters ever, and leave it at that.

Like Barry says, arguably - well that's what we're doing!

Erm, I dont think so. Try looking at these guys records and the fighters they fought and then compare it to Joes 2 bums a year reign. Saying Lynch was a all time great is different to saying Marciano would Ko Ali in 1... I dont remember saying anything like that. As for going by reports of the time whats wrong with that?... I should think that the writers knew rather more about those fighters than you do. Its very lazy to call a fighter 'great' just cause you've seen him a few times on ITV. JC is a world class fighter but his opposition has been far too mediocre for him to claim to be Britains best ever... he's just not good enough for that. Its arguable whether he is better than Eubank, Benn and Watson etc... its also arguable whether he would have beaten Ottke or if he would beat Kessler... you cant even say with real certainty that he is indeed the best 168 fighter of his era because he hasnt beaten the other outstanding fighters of that weight.... ....and to claim that he is better than the likes of Lewis, Berg, Lynch Mcavoy, Turpin etc is just shortsighted nonsense...

You can only really make meaningful comparisons within a particular era. Comparing Calzaghe with Benn, Eubank, Collins etc makes some sense, but comparisons with e.g. Jimmy Wilde is just daft. People rattle off names of such fighters who they’ve probably never seen fight.

The question really should be, “is Calzaghe the best of his era”?