BoxRec

The goal is to make a De La Hoya v Pacquiao fight entertaining no matter who wins.
If Manny wins it sets up numerous bouts,if Oscar wins then it also sets up bouts.

It's a win win all round.

A sceptic would bet Pacquiao if you know what I mean,especially at + 170 .

Hate to say it but the money angle has bet it all over.

Gray-Fox wrote:I am no major fan of Joe Calzaghe's style of boxing, but as a fellow boxer, I find the treatment of BRITAIN'S most successful boxer shocking. The man is UNBEATEN with a record only rivalled by Floyd Mayweather Jr's. I'm not saying he's beaten great fighters but they haven't been stinkers on the level of some of those that RJJR fought (Ricky Frazier anyone?). I wonder sometimes, if he was English or American, would he be treated the same? I highly doubt it.

The man has given his life to the sport and he was one of our most successful domestic amateurs, yet he STILL doesn't get the props he deserves. No wonder he wants out of the sport, and is bitter about people's treatment of him.

Clazaghe is a bona fide British Legend!

I agree he should have fought better some of the better fighters BUT with the exception of a Prime RJJ I think he would have beaten all comers!

In my book he is arguably the greatest British fighter ever!

Oh Boyo!!!!!

Ok, Joe is one of my fave fighters due to his style but the facts are:

He is one of the most talented British fighters ever
He beat Eubank for the title and had the world at his feet but never capitalized on that and with the exception of a few fights, nobody will remember much in between Eubank and Lacy
Recently he has beat Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins which shows he is still one of the best in the world

So there is no doubt he is one of the best in the world and has beaten a few great fighters but when nobody mentions any of his fights between Eubank and Lacy then he has done something wrong!

Gray Fox.

Sorry, I think you misread a bit - The "Roy Jones is/was one dimensional" is an arguement I am receiving from Calzaghe fans prior to this fight being signed. When I used to argue that Joe would not have beaten a prime Jones. They would argue he is one dimensional and Joe would have outclassed him, and now he has a "ready made excuse" for when he fails. People honestly think who I talk to that because I said 6 years ago, Jones would wipe the floor with Calzaghe that I still think that now. Because chronillogically Jones can't be that shot cause there is only 3 years between them in age!

Also regarding the 3 Hall of Famers being in the peak. Well Toney was, Hopkins for my money was and Virgil Hill was still a world champion nearly 10 years after their fight. And who were the other Hall of famers he could have faced? and when was a more suitable time. Jones' wouldn't have detracted from his critics if he fought Hopkins at Light Heavyweight when Bernard was 36. You could argue that Hopkins improved with time, but personally I have always maintained that the Hopkins of 1993 would have beaten the Trinidad of 2001 in equally emphatic fashion, and Hopkins would have always lost Jones from 1993-2003. Hill was 34 when they fought and was starting to slide but he was his first voluntary defence of the Light Heavyweight title - so couldn't have fought him much earlier (will Hopkins be a world champion in 2016). Toney was pretty much P4P #1 when they fought.

The two past it ones were McCallum (but then that was for a vacant WBC title - so he wasn't out of the picture past it) and Trinidad - in a joke of a fight admittedly.

Where are the British Pacquiao critics ?

Manny Pacquiao has a record that is begging to be destroyed.
It's a god damn turkey shoot for christ sakes ... look at it and compare it to Joe Calzaghe's.

Yet all the Brits do is attack one of their own.

Compare Calzaghe to Pacquiao
It's an open an shut case here are you kidding me.

Hopkins beat an undefeated 34-0 Pavlik.



Calzaghe beat Hopkins

Evander wrote:Where are the British Pacquiao critics ?

Manny Pacquiao has a record that is begging to be destroyed.
It's a god damn turkey shoot for christ sakes ... look at it and compare it to Joe Calzaghe's.

What?

This is a man who has been in with Marquez, Barrera, Morales, Larios, is about to face a much larger man in De La Hoya and has said he'd like a fight with Ricky Hatton.

Fantastic fighter and on his day was/is right up there - I think he gets slated far too much.

However, there has been a lot of meaningless matches, and people will always deride him for that. It's hard not to go with the flow on that score.

As someone said, I would never criticise Calzaghe on his abilities - he's one of the very few ones who have everything. But fact is fact, he hasn't made the most of his talents. I believe him taking a little more risk could've recognised him as one of the best of all-time. He's took risks where he's had all the advantages, whether it be at home or against a fighter who is past his best. He definitely should've unified before the Lacy fight and probably moved up. I mean could you imagine the hype for Jones vs Calzaghe in 2004 after Jones has beaten Tarver? It would've eclipsed anything I have ever seen, including Hatton v Mayweather in my opinion. It's just a shame that he's obviously more concerned with his unbeaten-record more so than actually fighting the best out there from a younger age.

Oh, and before you start - I am a hardcore Calzaghe fan, so no bias in my opinion.

Twinkle Toes wrote:Fantastic fighter and on his day was/is right up there - I think he gets slated far too much.

However, there has been a lot of meaningless matches, and people will always deride him for that. It's hard not to go with the flow on that score.

Agree totally.......I bet Ottke doesn't have this problem on German forums and he doesn't have Kessler, Hopkins or Lacy-standard fighters on his resume...

He should never have gone near the likes of Thornberry, Pudwill, Salem.. though, he wasted 3/4 years of his career on dross like that.

Evander wrote:Hopkins beat an undefeated 34-0 Pavlik.



Calzaghe beat Hopkins

?

Calzaghe did not beat Hopkins. Many had Hopkins winning. It should be a considered a draw. Because an SD like that, there are no winners.

Calzaghe would never fight Pavlik in a million years unless he was 38+ or just a hyped prospect.

As someone said, I would never criticise Calzaghe on his abilities - he's one of the very few ones who have everything. But fact is fact, he hasn't made the most of his talents. I believe him taking a little more risk could've recognised him as one of the best of all-time. He's took risks where he's had all the advantages, whether it be at home or against a fighter who is past his best

Exactly.

That is not slating Calzaghe, it's stating the truth.

We will never know what Calzaghe would have done Prime v Prime against a HOF or proper champ.

We know what happened agaisnt 43 year old HOF. a Dodgy SD is all he could manage.

Face it, the best fighter in his resume is Kessler. Who is good, but only fring-World Class imo.

Captain Hook wrote:

Twinkle Toes wrote:Fantastic fighter and on his day was/is right up there - I think he gets slated far too much.

However, there has been a lot of meaningless matches, and people will always deride him for that. It's hard not to go with the flow on that score.

Agree totally.......I bet Ottke doesn't have this problem on German forums and he doesn't have Kessler, Hopkins or Lacy-standard fighters on his resume...

He should never have gone near the likes of Thornberry, Pudwill, Salem.. though, he wasted 3/4 years of his career on dross like that.

I don't think even the most hardcore of Ottke fans will mention him in the same breath as Robinson, Ali etc - that what I am getting with Joe.

Ottke doesn't have a Hopkins fighter - but I would say Johnson is comparable to Kessler - lets not forget at one brief period Johnson was in most peoples P4P lists (after beating Woods, Jones and Tarver), and a few people had him beating Dawson who is now creeping into such lists, and Mundine is better than Lacy.

Kessler vs Johnson is a tough fight to call now.

DG. wrote:

Gray-Fox wrote:I am no major fan of Joe Calzaghe's style of boxing, but as a fellow boxer, I find the treatment of BRITAIN'S most successful boxer shocking. The man is UNBEATEN with a record only rivalled by Floyd Mayweather Jr's. I'm not saying he's beaten great fighters but they haven't been stinkers on the level of some of those that RJJR fought (Ricky Frazier anyone?). I wonder sometimes, if he was English or American, would he be treated the same? I highly doubt it.

The man has given his life to the sport and he was one of our most successful domestic amateurs, yet he STILL doesn't get the props he deserves. No wonder he wants out of the sport, and is bitter about people's treatment of him.

Clazaghe is a bona fide British Legend!

I agree he should have fought better some of the better fighters BUT with the exception of a Prime RJJ I think he would have beaten all comers!

In my book he is arguably the greatest British fighter ever!

Oh Boyo!!!!!

1st time in my life i agree with you DG

Pavlik's 0 was there for the taking - Calzaghe should've been the one to take it I feel, and then fight Jones.

Evander wrote:Where are the British Pacquiao critics ?

Manny Pacquiao has a record that is begging to be destroyed.
It's a god damn turkey shoot for christ sakes ... look at it and compare it to Joe Calzaghe's.

Yet all the Brits do is attack one of their own.

Compare Calzaghe to Pacquiao
It's an open an shut case here are you kidding me.

Here's 1, not happy he didnt face Joan Guzman and isn't facing the best at 135

mark thompson wrote:

DG. wrote:

Gray-Fox wrote:I am no major fan of Joe Calzaghe's style of boxing, but as a fellow boxer, I find the treatment of BRITAIN'S most successful boxer shocking. The man is UNBEATEN with a record only rivalled by Floyd Mayweather Jr's. I'm not saying he's beaten great fighters but they haven't been stinkers on the level of some of those that RJJR fought (Ricky Frazier anyone?). I wonder sometimes, if he was English or American, would he be treated the same? I highly doubt it.

The man has given his life to the sport and he was one of our most successful domestic amateurs, yet he STILL doesn't get the props he deserves. No wonder he wants out of the sport, and is bitter about people's treatment of him.

Clazaghe is a bona fide British Legend!

I agree he should have fought better some of the better fighters BUT with the exception of a Prime RJJ I think he would have beaten all comers!

In my book he is arguably the greatest British fighter ever!

Oh Boyo!!!!!

1st time in my life i agree with you DG

There will be many more times!

Post 1987, I'd rank the 160-175lbers as follows

1. Roy Jones
2. Hopkins
3. Toney
4. Calzaghe
5. DM

Which is high acclaim given Eubank, Benn, Nunn, McCellan, Tarver, Hill, Otke all operated in that time.

Joe is doing what no one thought he'd ever done, taking his opposition to this level since 2006. BUT his 2 opponents this year are not just past prime, they are Taylor, Tarver and Glen Johnson left overs

stujones wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:

Twinkle Toes wrote:Fantastic fighter and on his day was/is right up there - I think he gets slated far too much.

However, there has been a lot of meaningless matches, and people will always deride him for that. It's hard not to go with the flow on that score.

Agree totally.......I bet Ottke doesn't have this problem on German forums and he doesn't have Kessler, Hopkins or Lacy-standard fighters on his resume...

He should never have gone near the likes of Thornberry, Pudwill, Salem.. though, he wasted 3/4 years of his career on dross like that.

I don't think even the most hardcore of Ottke fans will mention him in the same breath as Robinson, Ali etc - that what I am getting with Joe.

Ottke doesn't have a Hopkins fighter - but I would say Johnson is comparable to Kessler - lets not forget at one brief period Johnson was in most peoples P4P lists (after beating Woods, Jones and Tarver), and a few people had him beating Dawson who is now creeping into such lists, and Mundine is better than Lacy.

Kessler vs Johnson is a tough fight to call now.

He beat Woods and a faded Jones - Kessler was a strong prospect and many on here believe he will now dominate the division. There is no comparison IMO.

Observer - on what planet did Hopkins beat Calzaghe? Come on, even after knocking him down he didn't go on the offensive.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Post 1987, I'd rank the 160-175lbers as follows

1. Roy Jones
2. Hopkins
3. Toney
4. Calzaghe
5. DM

Which is high acclaim given Eubank, Benn, Nunn, McCellan, Tarver, Hill, Otke all operated in that time.

Joe is doing what no one thought he'd ever done, taking his opposition to this level since 2006. BUT his 2 opponents this year are not just past prime, they are Taylor, Tarver and Glen Johnson left overs

Leftovers?

RJJ lost to Tarver and Johnson.

Hopkins beat Tarver and Johnson - CALZAGHE BEAT HOPKINS.

RJJ beat Hopkins.

Taylor beat B-Hop but B=Hop beat the guy who beat Taylor Twice.

He beat Woods, Jones and Tarver - before losing to Tarver. He won the IBF title vs Woods and Tarver was the WBA/WBC champion. Unfortunately, none of the belts were on the line when he beat Tarver - but had they been sanctioned he was the WBC/WBA and IBF champion. Given that the WBO champion around this period was firstly Gonzales (who lost to Woods) and Erdei - I think a case could be made for Johnson beating the #1, #2 and #3 in the devision. That aint bad going for someone with a non comparible resume to Kessler.

He warranted a P4P ranking, Kessler hasn't yet. Lets see if Kessler can beat the WBC and IBF champion before saying he will dominate the devision. Not only that but many people (I didn't) think he just beat the new Light Heavyweight "Kessler" (e.g. the man expected to dominate the next generation). As I said, Kessler vs Johnson is tough to call.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Post 1987, I'd rank the 160-175lbers as follows

1. Roy Jones
2. Hopkins
3. Toney
4. Calzaghe
5. DM

Which is high acclaim given Eubank, Benn, Nunn, McCellan, Tarver, Hill, Otke all operated in that time.

Joe is doing what no one thought he'd ever done, taking his opposition to this level since 2006. BUT his 2 opponents this year are not just past prime, they are Taylor, Tarver and Glen Johnson left overs

I'd be tempted to have Hill above Joe and Ottke above DM.

Evander wrote:You Brit's either constantly down your top guns when they are at the top or shoot them down when they are on the way up.
You just happen to have the Pound 4 Pound best fighter in the world in you midst.

Just because the English,Scots and Welsh fans have a beef with one another shouldn't get in the way of Joe Calzaghe's achievements.

You don't go 45-0 in 15 years by luck.
I can't stand this Pacquiao is number 1 bull.
You don't hold Pacquiao to the same standards as Calzaghe.
Some of you hold Calzaghe's relationship with his promoter against him.
Judge Calzaghe on his record like you would Pacquiao.

Judge Pacquiao's early career like you would Calzaghe's.
Judge Calzaghe's current form like you would Pacquiao's.

Some of you never seem satisfied.
What do you want ?

When we from North America were asking for a gun you said Lacy,we said fine.
Calzaghe kicked his ass.

We in North America asked for better.
You said Kessler.
We agreed and again Calzaghe kicked his ass.

We asked for a smart well adjusted veteran.
Enter Bernard Hopkins.
Calzaghe won again.

What the hell do you want ?
You have an absolutely great fighter in Calzaghe who just beat a fighter who dominated one of the hottest American prospects[Hopkins v Pavlik].

Get over it fella's and show some respect.
Joe Calzaghe is the Pound for Pound best fighter in the world today,why not enjoy it rather than complain .
Hell aren't you allways striving to become the best,now you have one of them and are not happy about it.

True, we pick anyone to peices. Just about any fighter can be critisized for something but a lot of what has been said about Joe is very unfair. He could have packed it in rather than face Lacy or Kessler and risk his unbeaten record, had that been so important. He wanted the fights but with Warren as his promoter, wanting him to stay unbeaten, it took a long time to fight the people he longed to fight. He begged Hopkins in his prime to fight him and Hopkins told him to get in line. Joe is a great fighter who has fought and beaten everyone he has faced. Most on here had him losing against Lacy, and then Kessler. Some thought he would lose to Hopkins and some believe he did. Now in his final fight a few think RJJ will beat him. We need faith and pride in a great British champion. As for him wanting big paydays, who would want to face the likes of Kessler and Hopkins for peanuts, I wouldnt. They say he slaps, but look at the mess he left Jeff Lacy in, no he hits hard enough to do the business. OK the Welsh are proud of their champion, why not, they have reason to be. The English are proud of nothing English while the Scots, Welsh and Irish seem very proud about their countries, so why cant we be. Its bad when an American guy comes on here asking why we are are not proud to have such a great British champion. Joe Calzaghe will be missed when he leaves boxing as one of our best ever champions.

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Post 1987, I'd rank the 160-175lbers as follows

1. Roy Jones
2. Hopkins
3. Toney
4. Calzaghe
5. DM

Which is high acclaim given Eubank, Benn, Nunn, McCellan, Tarver, Hill, Otke all operated in that time.

Joe is doing what no one thought he'd ever done, taking his opposition to this level since 2006. BUT his 2 opponents this year are not just past prime, they are Taylor, Tarver and Glen Johnson left overs

I'd be tempted to have Hill above Joe and Ottke above DM.

You're not looking at this impartially if you have Hill above an unbeaten Calzaghe. There must be something else to it.

You make good points about Kessler, but Johnson caught Jones at the right time, Woods was never even the best fighter in his home city, and Tarver is a vastly overrated lazy bastard.
I like Johnson, he was a brute, but Calzaghe would have outpointed him, same as he would have with Ottke.

Calzaghe would have lost to a peak Jones and a peak Toney. I think he'd have also had a close fight with Michael Nunn.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

Evander wrote:Where are the British Pacquiao critics ?

Manny Pacquiao has a record that is begging to be destroyed.
It's a god damn turkey shoot for christ sakes ... look at it and compare it to Joe Calzaghe's.

Yet all the Brits do is attack one of their own.

Compare Calzaghe to Pacquiao
It's an open an shut case here are you kidding me.

Here's 1, not happy he didnt face Joan Guzman and isn't facing the best at 135

Who gives a damn about Guzman, though? He's failed to make weight for two world title fights, and has pretty much buried himself.