BoxRec

Final Fight wrote:

pundit wrote:

perrycarter wrote:Sven Ottke for one.

Sven Ottke faced much better opposition than Joe Calzaghe. Glencoffe Johnson. Anthony Mundine. A prime Charles Brewer. Mads Larsen. Thomas Tate twice. Byron Mitchell when he still had a belt.

But also, as much as I like Ottke, he wasn't an emphatic winner at the highest level. He did extraordinarily well for himself, but he wasn't beating Brewer (2nd) and Mitchell by much. He would edge guys ever so slightly in important rounds.

Not like Ottke softened up Mitchell for Calzaghe, LOL.

Though I don't buy into the robbery myths that surround Ottke, he was meant to be lucky in the 1st Brewer, 1st Tate (when cut), and no way did he beat Reid or Larsen.

No, of course he wasn't. Just the super-middleweight with the best record of the past 10 years.

The winner of Calzaghe Kessler would top him though.

perrycarter wrote:Sven Ottke for one. Larry Holmes is another.

While I've little respect for slap-happy Sven's style and consider him another protected stay-at-home EuroChamp, he faced and beat far more of the top SMW contenders of his era than Calzaghe has.

And Holmes ... are you on crack? Just one fight -- Holmes-Norton -- by itself elevates Holmes' career level of opposition well above Calzaghe's. Good lord, to be so deluded as to think Holmes was "as protected as Calzaghe." Un-fricking-believable. That's almost as moronic as Damien's now-legendary problems-with-the-altitude-in-Cardiff post.

Eric the Viking wrote:

perrycarter wrote:Sven Ottke for one. Larry Holmes is another.

While I've little respect for slap-happy Sven's style and consider him another protected stay-at-home EuroChamp, he faced and beat far more of the top SMW contenders of his era than Calzaghe has.

And Holmes ... are you on crack? Just one fight -- Holmes-Norton -- by itself elevates Holmes' career level of opposition well above Calzaghe's. Good lord, to be so deluded as to think Holmes was "as protected as Calzaghe." Un-fricking-believable. That's almost as moronic as Damien's now-legendary problems-with-the-altitude-in-Cardiff post.

Not necessarily. Norton was an elite fighter past his best. And overrated, seeing as though he's in the Hall of Fame. Also, no way was it the close fight that it's gone down as. Holmes was dominant over the first half while the 2nd half was fierce give and take with Holmes' arm injured...

Shit, Calzaghe beat an elite fighter past his prime (Eubank) to win his first title.

Holmes' best win was Gerry Cooney, unbeaten left hooker beaten in a memorable night and subsequently written off as exposed. Calzaghe's biggest win - same circumstances right down to the LEFT HOOK - was Lacy.

Holmes beat lots of raw inexperienced punchers, Weaver, James Smith, Berbick who'd go on to alphabet belts...Calzaghe beat a handful of good former titlists, many of whom were 1-D punchers.

Holmes ditched his WBC title for the IBF so he could fight easy guys for decent money post prime (Marvis Frazier, David Bey)...Calzaghe picked and chose with the WBO.

Holmes has 20 defenses, Joe has 20 defenses.

Larry was a gritty underrated fighter because of much of the above. To reinforce his greatness, things like longevity, a superlative jab, an awesome heart and an ability to get up from bad knockdowns...Calzaghe has a lot of qualities as well.

All we need is a modern version of Holmes-Spnks...howabout Jermain Taylor rises in weight, wins a bitterly controversial decision.

One KEY difference - Joe has a genuine equal waiting for him, Kessler. Maybe he avoids Kessler, like Larry was all jittery about Pink Thomas and Mike Dokes, LOL. Better hope Kessler goes on a coke bender, ha!

Final Fight wrote:

Eric the Viking wrote:

perrycarter wrote:Sven Ottke for one. Larry Holmes is another.

While I've little respect for slap-happy Sven's style and consider him another protected stay-at-home EuroChamp, he faced and beat far more of the top SMW contenders of his era than Calzaghe has.

And Holmes ... are you on crack? Just one fight -- Holmes-Norton -- by itself elevates Holmes' career level of opposition well above Calzaghe's. Good lord, to be so deluded as to think Holmes was "as protected as Calzaghe." Un-fricking-believable. That's almost as moronic as Damien's now-legendary problems-with-the-altitude-in-Cardiff post.

Not necessarily. Norton was an elite fighter past his best. And overrated, seeing as though he's in the Hall of Fame. Also, no way was it the close fight that it's gone down as. Holmes was dominant over the first half while the 2nd half was fierce give and take with Holmes' arm injured...

Shit, Calzaghe beat an elite fighter past his prime (Eubank) to win his first title.

Holmes' best win was Gerry Cooney, unbeaten left hooker beaten in a memorable night and subsequently written off as exposed. Calzaghe's biggest win - same circumstances right down to the LEFT HOOK - was Lacy.

Holmes beat lots of raw inexperienced punchers, Weaver, James Smith, Berbick who'd go on to alphabet belts...Calzaghe beat a handful of good former titlists, many of whom were 1-D punchers.

Holmes ditched his WBC title for the IBF so he could fight easy guys for decent money post prime (Marvis Frazier, David Bey)...Calzaghe picked and chose with the WBO.

Holmes has 20 defenses, Joe has 20 defenses.

Larry was a gritty underrated fighter because of much of the above. To reinforce his greatness, things like longevity, a superlative jab, an awesome heart and an ability to get up from bad knockdowns...Calzaghe has a lot of qualities as well.

All we need is a modern version of Holmes-Spnks...howabout Jermain Taylor rises in weight, wins a bitterly controversial decision.

One KEY difference - Joe has a genuine equal waiting for him, Kessler. Maybe he avoids Kessler, like Larry was all jittery about Pink Thomas and Mike Dokes, LOL. Better hope Kessler goes on a coke bender, ha!

Oooh Holmes was sure jittery over Thomas and Page, who were both beaten by Trevor Berbick, who Holmes almost shut-out for 15 rounds, give me a break.

Norton was in the twilight of his prime vs Holmes, but no way was he washed up or comparable to Chris Eubank. Eubank not only had more mileage on him, but was clearly drained from coming back down to 168. If Norton had had to make the 200 lb cruiser limit to fight Holmes, then we have a comparison.

Weaver and Witherspoon were both at their peak vs Holmes ( Weaver had already fought both Bobicks, Stan Ward twice, Leroy Jones, and Bernardo Mercado and had 27 pro fights . . .and Terrible Tim only got fatter with experience). And Holmes ditched the belts b.c of sanctioning fees and being fed up with Don King.

I like Calzaghe but I def. do not feel his 20 title defenses is in the same league with Larry Holmes.

I disagree Eubank was shot. Drained somewhat yes, because he was due a fight at 175. But Chris showed some decent power and a good workrate - he was in some fierce exchanges and even staggered Calzaghe late...That was a huge step up for Joe.

Look at Eubank's next fight and tell me he was shot...He had WBO cruiser king Thompson totally out on his feet, but let him survive due to demons harking back to the 2nd Watson fight.

I agree with your last statement, because it took Calzaghe longer to get universal recognition with him being British.

Holmes didn't want Thomas or Dokes, who were ultra talented, but both squandered their talent because they couldn't cope with success and blew all their money on drugs...Larry didn't know Berbick was going to beat Thomas! Or that Weaver would upset Tate!

Obviously, by contrast, Holmes was great in the sense that he had his shit together, stayed fit, made all the money he could, looked for the best deals.

For me, Ottke was more impressive in handling Mitchell than Calzaghe was (as good a comeback as that was for Joe).

I fail to see how people had the Ottke vs Mitchell fight close.

Ottke vs Larsen, Ottke vs Reid, Ottke vs Brewer, Ottke vs Starie were all close fights - but Ottke vs Mitchell was one sided IMO.

Final Fight wrote:I disagree Eubank was shot. Drained somewhat yes, because he was due a fight at 175. But Chris showed some decent power and a good workrate - he was in some fierce exchanges and even staggered Calzaghe late...That was a huge step up for Joe.

Look at Eubank's next fight and tell me he was shot...He had WBO cruiser king Thompson totally out on his feet, but let him survive due to demons harking back to the 2nd Watson fight.

I agree with your last statement, because it took Calzaghe longer to get universal recognition with him being British.

Holmes didn't want Thomas or Dokes, who were ultra talented, but both squandered their talent because they couldn't cope with success and blew all their money on drugs...Larry didn't know Berbick was going to beat Thomas! Or that Weaver would upset Tate!

Obviously, by contrast, Holmes was great in the sense that he had his shit together, stayed fit, made all the money he could, looked for the best deals.

I never said Eubank was shot, but the weight loss clearly affected gim, and the proof is his greater energy and work-rate in the two Thompson fights at cruiserweight.

Mitchell, Reid, Brewer, and Lacey are a very solid resume, but Calzaghe's resume does not come close to the depth of Holmes: Roy Tiger Williams, Earnie Shavers (twice), Ken Norton, Mike Weaver, Gerry Cooney, Tim Witherspoon, and Trevor Berbick.

dempseyfire wrote:

Final Fight wrote:I disagree Eubank was shot. Drained somewhat yes, because he was due a fight at 175. But Chris showed some decent power and a good workrate - he was in some fierce exchanges and even staggered Calzaghe late...That was a huge step up for Joe.

Look at Eubank's next fight and tell me he was shot...He had WBO cruiser king Thompson totally out on his feet, but let him survive due to demons harking back to the 2nd Watson fight.

I agree with your last statement, because it took Calzaghe longer to get universal recognition with him being British.

Holmes didn't want Thomas or Dokes, who were ultra talented, but both squandered their talent because they couldn't cope with success and blew all their money on drugs...Larry didn't know Berbick was going to beat Thomas! Or that Weaver would upset Tate!

Obviously, by contrast, Holmes was great in the sense that he had his shit together, stayed fit, made all the money he could, looked for the best deals.

I never said Eubank was shot, but the weight loss clearly affected gim, and the proof is his greater energy and work-rate in the two Thompson fights at cruiserweight.

Mitchell, Reid, Brewer, and Lacey are a very solid resume, but Calzaghe's resume does not come close to the depth of Holmes: Roy Tiger Williams, Earnie Shavers (twice), Ken Norton, Mike Weaver, Gerry Cooney, Tim Witherspoon, and Trevor Berbick.

My comparisons are fair. You're not supposed to ? a guy who's been canonised as a legend, but I don't see te problem. Like I say, I can't see a clearer parallel than Lacy and Cooney!

The situation with Eubank - faded but still good, vacant title - is somewhat similar to Norton. Not identical. Eubank actually fought a good pace by his standards & was competitive vs a guy known for his huge workrate...Norton was still good, but slowed down & it took him half a fight to get going.

-Back in the day ppl complained about Holmes' competition. When he ditched the WBC for the desperate IBF, he fought a couple of tomato cans that suggests he would have lapped up a big payday vs a reality TV star.

-His fight with Cobb is considered a sick mismatch, as is for instance Ocasio. Obviously with Calzaghe there are a few to choose from, Sobot, McIntyre, Pudwill, Jiminez.

-Spoon was good, but Holmes got lucky somewhat in a great fight. That and the fight with Williams - which was a horrible decision - obviously saw Holmes taking some late risks...Calzaghe has 3 very tough top contenders, Inkin, Bute, Froch - let's see if that happens. I foresee difficulties in my crystal ball...

-Holmes definitely didn't want Thomas, Page, Dokes. Calzaghe ignored Kessler till now...though Kessler is more focused than those talented but ill disciplined heavies.

-Holmes losing to smaller man Spinks, controversiall = modern day parallel would be Calzaghe vs Taylor, though the weight bridge is far smaller Taylor is an awkward (less so than Spinks) guy who can make fights harder than they need to be.

-As I say, Berbick, Smith and Weaver were very very raw, though they did go on to do something & prove their power. Not too far removed from a heavy hitting, somewhat 1-D Brewer & Mitchell.

Ultimately, Holmes' career is well over which definitely makes comparisons favor him. But I've enjoyed looking into parallels. Calzaghe actually hads a rich top ten - Kessler, Mundine, Inkin, Froch, Bute - from which to choose from.

How can anyone compare Joe Calzaghe with Larry Holmes? Ones a WBO super middleweight champion and the others a top 3 or 4 heavyweight champion of all time. The only comparison is that they both made 20 defences of a title; their career legacies are completely different

Another Sportsnetwork/Calzaghe rip-off. We all knew Manfredo didn't belong in there. What rot !

Carl Froch's last opponent was probably better equipped to mount a challenge. The difference being Froch's contest was labelled a "world title" fight.

Holmes had terrible opposition. His best defense was probably against Gerry Cooney, and that isn't saying a whole lot.

The rest of his defenses fall into three catagories:

1. Green, rookie fighters who in no way shape or form had any business fighting for a world title at such an early stage of their careers even if later on they became quality fighers (Ocasio, Spinks, Witherspoon, Frazier, Smith, Bey, Williams)

2. Guys who used to be good but were past their primes. (Ali, Norton, Shavers)

3. Bums, C-level fighters or lower. (Evangelista, Zanon, Jones, LeDoux, Cobb, Rodriguez, Frank, Berbick, Snipes)

To Holmes' credit he did not duck anyone who was clearly his #1 contender or anything. It was just a dreadfully poor era.