Autobarn wrote:observer1 wrote:WildWaylon wrote:If Calzaghe lost it would tarnish his legacy having been beaten by a middleweight. If Pavlik lost, the unbeaten record would go and the rising star would have to rise again. Too risky for both men, so its best avoided. Great fight for us though, I do admit. Joe wants a big name, a big payday and a 60/40 or better chance of winning IMO. To retire undefeated after so many fights and so many years has to be his goal. Enzos lads have had a pretty hard time of late, Rees, Macca and Lockett all losing so I cant see him wanting his own lad in a fight that could end the dream. The finale to Joes career has to be carefully planned and I believe will be for the reasons I have given.
60/40 ?
95/5 more like it.
What is it with British Fighters (Or Athletes in General) taking the Easiest Possible Option Possible.
Lennox Lewis? Nigel Benn? David Haye? Clinton Woods?
You talk about "easiest possible option possible" (nice syntax) for Joe. Yes his career has been planned and plotted. But Joe is also past it, just not as badly as Jones.
We all know Joe v Jones is a crap fight, but is it necessary to go so far overboard?
Maybe i did, but what i mean was Haye and Woods have taken the hard route, Twice more than Calzaghe and Hatton ever have done, yet their rewards are not even Half of what Calzaghe and Hatton have gained.
British fans seem to love to jump the band-wagon when it comes to Calzaghe and Hatton. But it when it comes to true athletes like Haye, Woods, Frock etc. Nobody has ever even heard of them, pretty lame considering they have worked very hard to get where they were.
Calzaghe IMO is wasted talent, where as Hatton, i have him in the same league of atheletes as that of Time Henman... Over-rated and hyped.
