Page 2 of 4
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 09 Jun 2008, 18:03
by EddieShredder
Max Molyneux wrote:Asterix wrote:Max Molyneux wrote:Calzaghe has taken harder punches than what Pavlik has thrown and not been hurt.
Pavlik Is going the route Gatti did with that brawling style.
He comes forward too recklessly and thats made for Joe.
Pavlik Vs Froch would be a more competitive fight as they both head hunt. Froch would win because he has the better chin. Be a fight for you slugfest fans.
Pavlik doesn't come forward recklessly. He uses his jab and methodically persues his opponent. You could see in the Lockett fight that he's not just about head shots. He really hurt Lockett with a body shot. It was a very impressive performance and Pavlik keeps going up in my estimation.
Wasn't hard to hit still, Lockett was just too small for a trading match with Pavlik.
Abraham would beat Pavlik too being the tougher chinned fighter, there both one dimensional sluggers with power.
Sturm could keep distance moving In and out jabbing Pavlik.
Pavlik.... a one dimensional slugger??
F@ck me....

Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 05:03
by tony3
I've never bet against Calzaghe but this time I think father time will catch up with him against a solid, live and heavy-handed champion operating close to the peak of his powers.
This is based principally on Joe's performance against Hopkins and I could be totally wrong, but even if one accounts for the quality of opposition, he looked as if he had aged a decade since Lacygate. The timing, pace and sheer vibrancy just weren't there. Worse still, it seems as if his punch resistance is on the wane - the B Hop right that deposited him on the canvas wouldn't have budged him four or five years ago IMO.
If Calzaghe can go to America and beat a boxer as good and as young as Kelly Pavlik, in a convincing fashion, then for me, all of the questions that will doubtless remain after he has hung up his gloves will be firmly overshadowed by the fact that he was indeed a great.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 06:18
by Max Molyneux
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 06:47
by Max Molyneux
Terry D wrote:Max Molyneux wrote:
Yep he Is Indeed.
Yeah, I suppose Joe Fraizer and Marciano were also

Frazier had more head movement like bobbing and weaving.
Marciano just fouled alot and had heart.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 07:01
by DavidPayne
Max, this isn't Fight Night.
Fighters have great varieties in style. You cannot pigeon all as either slugger or dancer.
Marciano was far more than a face first fouler. Ridiculous. And to group Pavlik in with them is also daft.
Physically he's a mile different to either Frazier and the Rock and works off a long jab.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 07:04
by Max Molyneux
If It's so Intelligent pressure then why Is Pavlik so easy to hit? Even a negative boxer like Taylor outboxed him In the rematch.
Marciano was a cheat, doubt he would of got far without the fouling. Strong guy with a heart but nothing special.
You guys do the the old timers too much over service because you were taught old timers were better and the younger timers were softer.
I didn't group Pavlik with them, Terry mentioned Rocky and Frazier.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 07:19
by DavidPayne
He's easy to hit because he doesn't have much upper body movement, he relies on his height and judging distance to protect him, which doesn't always work but is the foundation of his defence.
I wouldn't call him a pressure fighter. I think he's quite an upright boxer who throws hard shots from distance. I thought he had good hand-speed and reasonable shot-selection. Though Gary made that aspect relatively easy by standing on the outside. Virtually any shot would have landed at any given time.
He appears to like a scrap and is quick to turn up the heat when he catches you.
He's entertaining with about being a maniac.
Marciano would have been murder for anyone from 175 up. Remember he beat some very proficient Light-heavyweights like Charles and Moore. Very skilled, cute operators with good work ethic and a good thud. Marciano had resiliance and grit precious few of his modern counterparts possess but he was far more than just those qualities.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 08:59
by nickd
I think this could be a fight too far for Calzaghe. Dropping in weight and coming up against a big puncher like Pavlik might be too much for him.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 11:52
by MightyWarrior
Sounds like this one might just come off - both camps will be confident of winning I think, so no big obstacle there you'd think.
Close fight, Joe's hands wont allow him to hurt or stop Pavlik, and Joe's chin will hold up against a good punching middleweight I think - a very close fight going down to the wire I reckon.
The younger man might just pull it off - first time I've ever picked the other guy v Calzaghe, but that could change and Joe could still win this if he's got one more great performance in him.
50/50 and a top of the line superfight.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 10 Jun 2008, 13:29
by Autobarn
I'm picking Pavlik. I've been wrong picking Kessler vs Calzaghe. But Joe does do things wrong, someone should make him pay for it eventually.
Regardless of who wins, I think this is the biggest fight out there for Joe and - if he moves down in weight, AND fights in America - this will be the 1st time he gives away the advantages.
Thought Joe boxed brilliantly vs Kessler, but his legs didn't look right.
Pavlik is young, improving, and powerful. Is Joe mentally already on the seniors tour?
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 07:47
by Phenomenal-Nutrition
Terry D wrote:
That is ridiculous. Have you watched Marciano box, with your seat facing the screen?
Marciano moved his head also, and often when a punch was on its way in. He was no Pep but he had more than heart and fouls. In fact your comment is ignorant.
.
Illustrating your point, watch and learn MAx:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b0yHvw-vW0
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 07:53
by Dioufy
Pavlik hasn't been in with a mover like Joe, fighters like Miranda, Zunniga, Zertuche and Taylor stood in front of Kelly and tried to trade, well apart from Taylor in the second fight in which I had Taylor nicking it by one point. But when Taylor moved and didn't engage in a war like the other fighters he made Pavlik miss and expand a lot of energy - it's only aylor's poor stamina that didn't win him that fight with Pavlik. Whereas, Joe will move and pick Kelly off coming forward because Pavlik does get a little predictable and can be slow in throwing his bombs. Providing Kelly doesn't catch Joe with an absolute pearler then Calzaghe should win, and even if Kelly did catch Joe flush, would it affect him like it did Miranda, Taylor and Zertuche? I don't think so because Joe has an iron jaw.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 08:24
by Asterix
Thanks for posting that. I've watched a couple of Marciano fights and thought he was an excellent boxer, and that video helps show it.

Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 08:37
by jamesmcdonnell
DavidPayne wrote:He's easy to hit because he doesn't have much upper body movement, he relies on his height and judging distance to protect him, which doesn't always work but is the foundation of his defence.
I wouldn't call him a pressure fighter. I think he's quite an upright boxer who throws hard shots from distance. I thought he had good hand-speed and reasonable shot-selection. Though Gary made that aspect relatively easy by standing on the outside. Virtually any shot would have landed at any given time.
He appears to like a scrap and is quick to turn up the heat when he catches you.
He's entertaining with about being a maniac.
Marciano would have been murder for anyone from 175 up. Remember he beat some very proficient Light-heavyweights like Charles and Moore. Very skilled, cute operators with good work ethic and a good thud. Marciano had resiliance and grit precious few of his modern counterparts possess but he was far more than just those qualities.
Marciano had inhuman powers of recovery and punch resistance.
Archie Moore was a phenomenal puncher, who had felled many a heavyweight, and yet after nailing him with a massive right cross, Marciano proceeded to tear Moore to pieces.
Moore said that like many others before him, he thought Marciano looked crude as hell and easy to beat, but when it came to it, he was just impossible to deter.
Considering that Moore had fought big heavyweights over 6'2" and over 220 lbs, and prevailed, the fact that Marciano was only 187 lbs, is irrelevant, he carried incredibly punch power, and absolutely destroyed an arguably peak Archie Moore.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 10:57
by Captain Hook
Max Molyneux wrote:
Yep he Is Indeed.
Is he fornicate, bloody hell he's better than that. I'd fancy JC in one last hurrah but this would be his hardest fight, the guy is bang on form as well.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 11:48
by Max Molyneux
Captain Hook wrote:Max Molyneux wrote:
Yep he Is Indeed.
Is he eff, bloody hell he's better than that. I'd fancy JC in one last hurrah but this would be his hardest fight, the guy is bang on form as well.
Not even as mobile as someone like Kessler to give a strong effort.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 11 Jun 2008, 15:26
by nickd
Max you seriously talk some shit where Calzaghe is concerned. Pavlik is way more than a one dimensional slugger. Everyone can see that but you.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 05:18
by chris_23
One big issue for me in this is size. Pavlik is HUGE literally and I wouldn't like to think how much he kills himself for weight at Middle so there is a chance he could end up stronger at Super Middle or some catch weight. I know Joe is naturally a big guy but this isn't a Super Middle v a Middle as naturally they are probably very similar in size...
I thought Pavlik was awesome v Lockett but I think Calzaghe would beat him NOW but lets not forget he's 36 so they should make the fight NOW if they want it to happen rather than talk about it for a year because that may go against Calzaghe.
I personally think its a bad fight for Joe, he's got nothing to prove and everything to lose, think he should retire undefeated rather than risk going on too long. What is it they always say, fighters always go a bridge too far..
I think Pavlik is the next superstar of World boxing so for him to lose to Calzaghe would be a shame too..
I think they are different generations and Joe is the one in the driving seat on this..
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 07:02
by Max Molyneux
nickd wrote:Max you seriously talk some shit where Calzaghe is concerned. Pavlik is way more than a one dimensional slugger. Everyone can see that but you.
Everyone but me must have terrible judgmental skills then. I am right when Calzaghe wins though still.
Calzaghe will have an easy night with him and It's Insane to think Joe will have trouble with the Middleweight Gatti.
Calzaghe Is leagues above Lockett an Taylor and Taylor shouldn't of got a loss In the rematch, he out jabbed and boxed Pavlik pretty handily, Pavlik looked stiff and kept behind a tight guard throwing little.
Pavlik's a KO waiting to happen, If he trades with anyone like Kessler or Abraham, he's getting laid out. Abraham's one dimensional too but he takes a shot better than Kelly and has Insane durability.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 07:39
by Chambers2
Max Molyneux wrote:
Pavlik's a KO waiting to happen, If he trades with anyone like Kessler or Abraham, he's getting laid out.
Someone like Edison Miranda???
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 07:51
by Lenny
Got to respect Max's persistence. Especially since Terry D has made it his mission to school him in each discussion, he sticks to his guns even though we all tell him he's wrong.
I'm not sure Joe is as elusive as some make out. I feel Pavlik is a smoother combination puncher than Kessler with a higher punch output. Considering how close Calzaghe v Kessler was, how hard Joe had to work and the time that has now passed, my money would be on Pavlik.
Although the fight won't happen in my opinion. Joe will bow out after beating Jones Jnr and possibly fighting Tarver.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 08:12
by Wrists
Max mate - no one is a bigger Calzaghe fan than yours truly
No one thinks he gets a raw deal on here more than me
However to dismiss Pavlik as 'one dimensional slugger' is silly
This is a guy who has beaten a guy twice who beat Hopkins twice who JC struggled to beat. Those are the facts.
Now I know its not as easy as A beats B B beats C therefore A pisses all over C!
However, right now Pavlik is the greatest threat to Calzaghe - I wouldn't want Joe to take any rights from Pavlik that he took from a light puncher in Hopkins let me tell you that!
Pavlik is a big strong guy who punches hard and is fit and yes could Joe fits if they meet.
Is it possible for Joe to do a Lacy on him? - well maybe but Pavlik is no Lacy.
My view is that Joe still beats Pavlik simply because he can adjust and would make the fight ala Kessler moving away boxing jabs etc etc and Pavlik aint smart enough (yet) to counter that.
If you say Joe easily beats Pavlik at this stage of their careers you are deluded.
Calzage 117-112 Pavlik
Regards
Wrists
PS. Max you open yourself for a right slating on here my friend 8)
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 08:19
by Captain Hook
Max Molyneux wrote:nickd wrote:Max you seriously talk some shit where Calzaghe is concerned. Pavlik is way more than a one dimensional slugger. Everyone can see that but you.
Everyone but me must have terrible judgmental skills then. I am right when Calzaghe wins though still.
Calzaghe will have an easy night with him and It's Insane to think Joe will have trouble with the Middleweight Gatti.
Calzaghe Is leagues above Lockett an Taylor and Taylor shouldn't of got a loss In the rematch, he out jabbed and boxed Pavlik pretty handily, Pavlik looked stiff and kept behind a tight guard throwing little.
Pavlik's a KO waiting to happen, If he trades with anyone like Kessler or Abraham, he's getting laid out. Abraham's one dimensional too but he takes a shot better than Kelly and has Insane durability.
This is just ignorant, you don't hammer Miranda, beat Taylor twice and destroy Lockett by being leagues below JC.
I would fancy JC to edge him on points but he would have to be in the shape of his life.
Take the blinkers off, Pavlik is gettign better and JC is coming to the end of the road.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 08:32
by Poncey
I wouldn't call him 3D either, though, Terry. He's somewhere inbetween and I'm still not convinced with his body punching. I want to see Kelly fight a slickster, not a brawler (which at least 3 of his 4 opponents have been, and Taylor I was a bit of a brawl). Then I'll believe the hype.
Re: Calzaghe v Pavlik - who wins?
Posted: 12 Jun 2008, 08:39
by Poncey
Terry D wrote:Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:I wouldn't call him 3D either, though, Terry. He's somewhere inbetween and I'm still not convinced with his body punching. I want to see Kelly fight a slickster, not a brawler (which at least 3 of his 4 opponents have been, and Taylor I was a bit of a brawl). Then I'll believe the hype.
Taylor was pretty slick in fight II and Pavlik went for the body at a crucial time so there is a sign that he thinks in there. He is definitely not 1-D. Fighters like him, and Marciano for that matter, look like anyone could step into the ring and defeat them but the reality is that before you know it they are undercutting your supposed greater skills and taking you apart.
He is effective at what he does.
I'm probably being cynical (let's be honest, we all are) but to say Kelly is a true great in the making when the two biggest names on his record struggled to make the weight, and I thought Taylor almost won the second fight (115-113 Kelly), doesn't exactly enthuse me about this Kid.
It's a shame there isn't that much quality at 160 like there is at 135 and 147 to test him properly.