BoxRec

On the Tyson front in his hey day who else should he have fought?

When was his hay-day because for the whole of the nineties he was very carefully matched.

Mercer, Briggs, Foreman, Moorer, Lewis, Bowe, Byrd, Tua would have all been more dangerous than the saps he fought.

In his pomp he was incredible, but I do so wish Witherspoon hadn't phoned it in versus Smith and got the shot, because he was cute enough and strong enough and hit hard enough to have done the Buster Douglas before Buster did.

DavidPayne wrote:My only counter to this is, how old were light-heavies Moore, Charles and heavies Louis and Walcott when Marciano fought them, and at least two dropped him, if I'm not mistaken?

We rever Marciano's 49-0 but he too, lacked his natural contemporary but is forgiven because of his style.

We forgive Dempsey for the ommissions from his resume too.

And Tyson is also widely forgiven for knock-overs when harder hitting more capable guys were operating.

Calzaghe is a curious subject. I've written more about him than anyone else and still I cannot capture how I feel about him.

I cheer him and I smile when he's knocked down. I applaud his brilliance but point out his shortcomings. It almost depends which side of bed I get out.

He will always remain an infuriating subject, but I will miss him when he retires.

I don't forgive Dempsey anything, nor Marciano. Dempsey was a great fighter, but a wildly overrated heavyweight champ who avoided most of the most dangerous contenders and defended his title LESS than once a year on average. Marciano was never tested by a young and truly dangerous contemporary.

Moore himself however fought LOADS of young lions after his title, and whilst he may have done down, he got up and mauled them, in between making forays to heavyweight.

I am talking the 80s not after he came out of prison!

I actually think a win over Glen Johnson would do a lot for Joe's standing at light heavyweight.

Johnson made a case for beating Dawson, and has been in with just about every world class and fringe world class 175-pounder since 2003. It's easier to fight a 39 yo (Johnson) than a fast 26 yo (Dawson). They have unfinished business - Joe pulling out, insulting Johnson, and GJ going on to win 2004 fighter of the year. GJ's fought lots of southpaws in the past 5 years, and knows what he's doing enough to make an exciting fight. Despite being old, he fights hard & gives actual value for money. They could dress this fight up if they wanted. Johnson would travel to the UK most likely, and a big crowd would come for Joe's farewell.

HOWEVER, Glen is low profile, dangerous, durable. He fought last night, a win that didn't even get any TV coverage. And even tho he did well v Dawson, he doesn't hold the WBC light heavyweight title & he doesn't mean much to Mr Average Fan.


Interesting that Jermain Taylor's fighting Lacy soon. Though both have lost their last big time bouts, being a US Olympian and former world champ is enough to get back on HBO. Let's say Taylor wins, looks great. He has 2 wins over Hopkins, so this helps Joe further get one over on Hopkins, if he batters Taylor. Taylor's been in with big names, and held titles not long ago. Taylor would have nothing to lose challenging Joe at light heavy. He'll still be WBC super middle mandatory, so if he lost to Joe, he moves down a weight and gets straight title shot! Jermain could make 175 - though he'd be a fair bit bloated - but he has the profile and the motivation (if not the popularity) to be Joe's next "superfight". There may be enough gain for Jermain not to price himself out. Thoughts?

Calzaghe-Johnson would be exactly the same thing now as it was 3/4/5 years ago. A good fight. No more, no less. I really fail to see what it would do for Joe Calzaghe's overall legacy. Johnson is hardly going to be remembered in the annuls of boxing.

Face it, Joe might as well call it quits. Nothing he does is going to leap him up the all-time p4p standings. He's going to the hall of fame, he's going to go down as the best 168lb'er of all time (whether you agree with that or not) and the only way he can improve his legacy is to invent a time machine. His best challenges are in the past. Why fret about it now? Beating Dawson isn't going to make up for not facing Jones 6-8 years ago. Just let it go.

Johnson's a good fight. I like good fights. Of course, we can say, "Joe would be too fast". But I prefer to see the fights actually happen, rather than dismissed on this or that grounds.

Sure it won't happen. Let's see what Taylor and Froch do over the next few weeks, see if this creates anything interesting...

James Lawton is a smug know-it-all who clearly doesnt know it all. Henry Cooper for crying out loud? Where's the mention of Lloyd Honeyghan?

He only likes success when it is over 30 years old, knob. I cant stand him.

As someone else said, stick to football and comment on the ills of that sport as it suits your humourless cynical gurning.

Autobarn wrote:Johnson's a good fight. I like good fights. Of course, we can say, "Joe would be too fast". But I prefer to see the fights actually happen, rather than dismissed on this or that grounds.

Sure it won't happen. Let's see what Taylor and Froch do over the next few weeks, see if this creates anything interesting...

I agree that Joe-Johnson is a good fight. But it's nothing more than that. So why would it ever take place? There's no need for Calzaghe to take it. It offers nothing to him.

Let Joe retire, leave the field free for the new generation. I'm more interested in Kessler versus Johnson, Froch, Bute, even Hopkins than I am in Calzaghe continuing.

I agree with the consensus here. Actually, I aint convinced you can call Joe the World Light Heavyweight champion untill he beats Dawson. Lets not forget Hopkins did retire for a year before he fought Joe and hasn't won a recognised belt there. Usually when a unified (with titles) belt holder retires, their titles are vacated.... so was Dawson the champion before Calzaghe vs Hopkins.

I disagree with Terry, I don't think Hopkins was BADLY faded (faded, but not like RJJ) but I don't think he lost either.

Fact is, much like Kessler (unlike Lacy) Dawson has beaten 2 of the #4 in the devision.... a minority of people are championing Woods vs Calzaghe as a last hurrah, but Dawson just OUTCLASSED a guy who outclassed Woods. I don't think Dawson vs Johnson was controvesial, I thought it was fair and Dawson learned from that. I don't think he is quite the finished article yet, but he looks the part.

Why are people questioning his chin vs Joe.... at 175 Joe can't punch.

Dawson is a fair enough opponent, but he is no great shakes and doesn't have a fan base in the US. Let's face it, Tarver looked terrible against him and he's got no real punch power. He might improve, but he looked very vulnerable against Johnson. Three years ago he boxed Jamie Hearn on the Calzaghe-Lacy undercard - I doubt he's ever been on Calzaghe's radar, he's a different generation.

It has to be between Froch and Dawson IMO (especially if the £5m offer is trueish), I'm hoping Froch gets the nod, but Dawsons got a great case for the fight as his wins over Johnson and Tarver are probably better than JC's 2 wins at the weight IMO.

The Calzaghe-Johnson fight is a great shout. It'd make for a cracking fight, but I don't see Calzaghe postponing his retirement to fight Glencoffe.


We missed out on the Hatton-Witter Battle of Britain, so I reckon we're due one. We just need Frochy to land a Brian Magee style uppercut on Dec 6th to land Pascal in row Z in the 3rd round.

Carl Froch is a BAAAAAAD man

stujones wrote:I agree with the consensus here. Actually, I aint convinced you can call Joe the World Light Heavyweight champion untill he beats Dawson. Lets not forget Hopkins did retire for a year before he fought Joe and hasn't won a recognised belt there. Usually when a unified (with titles) belt holder retires, their titles are vacated.... so was Dawson the champion before Calzaghe vs Hopkins.

I disagree with Terry, I don't think Hopkins was BADLY faded (faded, but not like RJJ) but I don't think he lost either.

Fact is, much like Kessler (unlike Lacy) Dawson has beaten 2 of the #4 in the devision.... a minority of people are championing Woods vs Calzaghe as a last hurrah, but Dawson just OUTCLASSED a guy who outclassed Woods. I don't think Dawson vs Johnson was controvesial, I thought it was fair and Dawson learned from that. I don't think he is quite the finished article yet, but he looks the part.

Why are people questioning his chin vs Joe.... at 175 Joe can't punch.

Good point on questioning Joe's status as light heavy champion. Joe was the disputed super middle champ for years. Now he can be the disputed light heavy champ. Hope Dawson and Gary Shaw pick up on it.

Personally, I don't think Joe cares, as long as HBO will call it a title fight & give him lots of money. And as long as some big names come to him.

Maybe Joe's chin should be question also. Dawson was dropped by a light jab from Harding, a right hand bomb from Adamek (a top 4 light heavy when they fought, IMO). Joe has been down in all his light heavy fights.

Can't see Joe going in with a young champ, southpaw, counter puncher. Even if Dawson was a massive name, I think Joe would avoid it on the grounds that he could lose the unbeaten record.

gobbles wrote:Dawson is a fair enough opponent, but he is no great shakes and doesn't have a fan base in the US. Let's face it, Tarver looked terrible against him and he's got no real punch power. He might improve, but he looked very vulnerable against Johnson. Three years ago he boxed Jamie Hearn on the Calzaghe-Lacy undercard - I doubt he's ever been on Calzaghe's radar, he's a different generation.

Dawson will have learned a lot beating Harding, Adamek, Johnson and Tarver. These were all top 10 light heavies, and 3 of these were top 5 light heavies when he fought them. These are actually Dawson's only fights at 175, along with that Ruiz guy and Mendoza. He destroyed Mendoza, the guy that nearly knocked out Lacy a few months ago.

I'll be happy to see Dawson vs young wrecking ball (and mandatory) Tavoris Cloud. But guess what, Dawson is going to avoid the fight and gun for the old names. This is definitely becoming a trend in boxing. And a problem.

Lacy did box on a Calzaghe undercard didn't he, and years later challenged Joe?

Autobarn wrote: Lacy did box on a Calzaghe undercard didn't he, and years later challenged Joe?

He was definately on a Hatton undercard at the MEN as I watched him beat Donnell Wiggins (Hatton Vs Tackie or Pedersen), not sure about a JC undercard though