BoxRec

Autobarn wrote:

RLewis wrote:

While I have no desire to get involved in such a pointless discussion as this, I was told by Sven Ottke's promoter, Wilfried Sauerland, after Ottke beat David Starie that they had no interest in facing Calzaghe, even in Germany. He repeated this with Arthur Abraham, when I suggested him as an opponent for Joe a few years later.

thanks for bringing that up, re ottke. it's a point worth making.

however, i can't see why joe or abraham would have been on each other's radar - presumably when abraham was a rookie champ down at middle?

it reflects more badly on ottke, than abraham, with calzaghe and ottke being super middle contemporaries. anyway, joe obviosuly made up for this gap by beating prime versions of lacy and kessler, taking their titles and their unbeaten records, in 2 GREAT nights of british boxing.

every time a super middle scores a big win, these threads happen. i have even started some. i think the reason is that joe did have a career that disappointed at crucial moments, that failed to deliver for many years, that finally promised great things but (IMO) cynically cashed out.

I didn't mean that to reflect badly on Abraham and I don't think it does as he was a champion at a different stage of his career than Joe.
I remember Abraham telling me he was a big fan of Calzaghe. The story also goes that he was totally unknown when he came into the Sauerland gym as a sparring partner and was signed up after he beat Ottke up in sparring.

I find it very hard to believe that Kessler was 'just not that good', in hindsight. Styles do make fights, but Kessler was absolutely vacant last night, wasn't able to capitalise on any of the openings Ward was presenting.

For a second after the fight, I thought Kessler was contemplating retirement! When asked what he'd do next, his answer was that he'd have to consider the situation and decide whether 'he's still got it', or not. That doesn't sound like a fighter who perhaps undertrained/underestimated an opponent, it sounded like a guy who was no longer sure he could compete. He's 3-2 in his last 5, and the 3 wins came against relative nobodies. Add injury and his time away from top level competition and I'm doubtful as to whether Kessler didn't lose more than just his titles against Calzaghe.

Of course, it may have something to do with Ward just being that good, I've rated him for a while now, but even then, Kessler just seemed absent in there.

I'm glad he's continuing in the tournament, at least we'll get a better indicator as to whether it was a case of a bad style match-up, or whether he's lost a step.

As for Calzaghe, for me it will significantly affect his legacy if it's downhill from here for Kessler. Even if he regains a belt and possibly beats one or two of his super 6 rivals, it's still been damaged somewhat. In the same way that Hopkins' win over Trinidad was tarnished by Wright's masterclass. Hopkins went on to solidify his legacy with wins over Tarver and Pavlik... not to mention his debatable loss to Calzaghe.

gobbles wrote:

liamlion wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote: Hopkins clearly lost, apart from the knockdown, all he did was foul, hold, fake being hurt from non low blows and cry to the ref. Plus Joe barehumped him. How can anyone say that was a debatable decision when Hopkins was a crybaby?

I totally disagree. The decision absolutely was debatable. No one won or lost that fight clearly, it was a close decision. Hence why people still debate the decision to this day!

Calzaghe may have thrown a thousand more slaps than Hopkins, but genuinely IMO Hopkins was the more controlled and skillful operator and did the more effective work in my eyes. Calzaghe looked like a poor amateur to me in this fight and didnt really land anything of note. Sure he pushed the pace but thats all he really did.

Hopkins had an absolute right to be upset at the decision. Hopkins clearly had more ring craft than Calzaghe.

If Hopkins was in control, why did he twice feign injury from phantom low blows in the later rounds?

I felt Hopkins was in control pretty much until the final few rounds of the fight. Sure, Hopkins was struggling with the pace in the last couple of rounds but remember to judge the fight over 12 rounds and not the last one or two.

Dont also forget that Hopkins decked Calzaghe, something which Calzaghe couldnt manage to do to his much older opponent.

liamlion wrote:I felt Hopkins was in control pretty much until the final few rounds of the fight. Sure, Hopkins was struggling with the pace in the last couple of rounds but remember to judge the fight over 12 rounds and not the last one or two.

Dont also forget that Hopkins decked Calzaghe, something which Calzaghe couldnt manage to do to his much older opponent.

Neither guy was in control. It was a very messy fight and no-one won (neither the boxers nor the fans).

yeah, that's cool r lewis. all i mean is it's only now that AA is coming out as a top super middle.

kessler's still very good. he beat andrade (who all but KO'd bute at the end), he dominated some tough top 10 fighters like siaca, lucas. he beat talented mundine in australia. he KO'd WBC champ beyer in a unification.

there's no shame in losing to big talents of fast, fluid style like calzaghe and ward.

also, oh what any british boxer would give to have a night like calzaghe-lacy, where everything went right vs a fighter the yanks wanted to believe in.

and, let's see kessler's other fights in the super 6, before writing kessler off. super 6 was always going to offer surprises because it takes away the role of the promoter hand picking the fights and guiding the career of the fighter, taking calculated risks only every now & again...kessler might do brilliantly in his next couple of fights, and you never know ward might flop badly...things change - as they did last saturday!

toomanyshots wrote:

frankwarrenfan wrote:ward's win has put a big dent in joe's legacy!

Cheers Spoiler

You could always, y'know, stay away from boxing websites when trying to avoid boxing results. Crazy idea, I know, but it just might work.

Surely the simple answer to this question is "As a pro, everyone who was ever put in front of him"

I wonder what Calzaghe thought of the fight himself?

Im sure his Argus column will have some feedback on there about it.

I'd be interested to see what Calzaghe's spin will be, I just hope he doesn't take credit for Kessler's loss, despite it being several years and 4 opponents later that Kessler hit the skids.

When i watched a few Ward fights and then a few Kessler clips, it was looking like the Dane would be too big and too powerful for Ward to handle, despite his obvious skill level.

I thought Kessler would and Ward would be competitive for the first segment of the fight, but as Kessler's punches began to accumulate, that Ward would start chickening out of exchanges and the rounds would slip away from him.

I thought it would be something like 113-116 for Kessler, with many rounds debatable, but the rounds Kessler wins, he would win clearly and without any dispute.

I thought the fight was too soon for Ward.

But like they all say, once upon a time, the likes of Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler had records where on paper they'd fought nobody - but when they stepped up eventually, they were colossal.

But despite Ward's win - I can't help but feel that Kessler never came to the party last Saturday. Perhaps he's had too many stiffs since Calzaghe and thought he could just go through the motions and the win would be his.

It's a similar situation to when you get an FA cup draw with someone like Chesterfield against Middlesborough - you see the little team play out of their skin against the obvious favourite and they shock everyone with the win.

Whilst I think the chasm in talent is a little closer with regards Kessler & Ward, I can't help but feel that Ward had trained all his life for this moment and was going to grab it with both hands on the night - whilst Kessler assumed it would be a harder than usual, but still largely a routine defence.

And it cost him an embarrassing defeat, a lot of credibility and his world title.

Kessler has shown us twice now, that a champion's 'Iron will to win at any costs' is not something he possesses.

Whilst Froch has lesser natural gifts, he's shown again and again that he does have that in his tool bag - that grit to walk through shots and be prepared to get off the canvas and throw the kitchen sink to get the victory.

That's why I'll pick Froch against Kessler in the next round.

Kessler will look to bounce back and win a title in his next fight and to look good for his home town fans - but he knows how to lose now and once that seed has been sown, it will sprout again and again when the going gets tough.

Calzaghe tipped Kessler to win the Super 6.

Again I don't think Ward is getting enough credit. Many saw him as a "dark horse" with alot to prove. Many thought he had the skills, but did he have the experience, guts, chin and stamina to do it. I think he answered alot of the questions.

Whilst Kessler was the favourite it would have been damn silly for him to think Ward was just a "stiff". The guy is an Olympic Gold Medalist and has looked impressive against lower level. Kessler might have his flaws, but he seems a very intelligent man and has not treated his previous opponents since Calzaghe as stiffs. He didn't just go through the motions with them, he's been impressive. He's not had a particularly hard career, so I don't think he went old overnight.

I would like to give Ward credit. Whether its a one off performance, or if he will always rise with the opponent remains to be seen. At the moment I think we might have witness the rise of a new star in the devision, and a fighter who exposed Kessler (who I still rate as a good fighter). I thought Kessler was really the heir apparent to Joe, indeed I would have loved to have seen Kessler vs Calzaghe 2. Well, guess he wasn't and I think Dirrell will give him fits also.

stujones wrote:Calzaghe tipped Kessler to win the Super 6.

Again I don't think Ward is getting enough credit. Many saw him as a "dark horse" with alot to prove. Many thought he had the skills, but did he have the experience, guts, chin and stamina to do it. I think he answered alot of the questions.

Whilst Kessler was the favourite it would have been damn silly for him to think Ward was just a "stiff". The guy is an Olympic Gold Medalist and has looked impressive against lower level. Kessler might have his flaws, but he seems a very intelligent man and has not treated his previous opponents since Calzaghe as stiffs. He didn't just go through the motions with them, he's been impressive. He's not had a particularly hard career, so I don't think he went old overnight.

I would like to give Ward credit. Whether its a one off performance, or if he will always rise with the opponent remains to be seen. At the moment I think we might have witness the rise of a new star in the devision, and a fighter who exposed Kessler (who I still rate as a good fighter). I thought Kessler was really the heir apparent to Joe, indeed I would have loved to have seen Kessler vs Calzaghe 2. Well, guess he wasn't and I think Dirrell will give him fits also.

fair enough, but welcome to the club. amost every time i praise a fighter for a performance, someone else comes along and criticises the opponent instead.

Terry D wrote:Kessler was always fairly predictable. Ward boxed well but it was hardly an earth-shattering coming out performance. Then Yanks have gone bonkers over him simply because they need as many decent fighters as they can get.

Calzaghe's career does not boil down to one fight. He beat some good names, avoided (or failed to push for fights with) some good names and retired with a shiny record that has its fair share of gaps. Kessler is a good SMW, not a potential great and certainly not unbeatable. Froch may well do him in the next round as he will be there to be hit. Then again, Froch won't be shy. It looks a better fight not that Kessler has lost, sorry, slipping into the wrong vernacular there...now that Kessler has been 'exposed', 'schooled' and 'owned'.

It doesn't boil down to one name, but the fact that his best win was against a relatively ordinary title holder - does speak volumes.

Calzaghe didn't defeat a fellow dominant fighter - perhaps not his own fault, the division lacked star appeal and natural talent, and Ottke wasn't exactly begging Joe to come over.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Calzaghe didn't defeat a fellow dominant fighter - perhaps not his own fault

The buck has to stop with him James. He could have and should have done so much more in his prime.

He only finally stepped out of the WBO wilderness when:

1) Hatton showed him the way
2) Boxing fans around the world had had it with him. He was practically bullied into taking the Lacy fight

The Jones win means nothing to me, and the Hopkins win not much more, the man was 44 and almost got the nod! Kessler needs reassesing in a few years, and if the shine is to be removed from that win, it will put a serious dent in Calzaghe's legacy IMO!

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Terry D wrote:Kessler was always fairly predictable. Ward boxed well but it was hardly an earth-shattering coming out performance. Then Yanks have gone bonkers over him simply because they need as many decent fighters as they can get.

Calzaghe's career does not boil down to one fight. He beat some good names, avoided (or failed to push for fights with) some good names and retired with a shiny record that has its fair share of gaps. Kessler is a good SMW, not a potential great and certainly not unbeatable. Froch may well do him in the next round as he will be there to be hit. Then again, Froch won't be shy. It looks a better fight not that Kessler has lost, sorry, slipping into the wrong vernacular there...now that Kessler has been 'exposed', 'schooled' and 'owned'.

It doesn't boil down to one name, but the fact that his best win was against a relatively ordinary title holder - does speak volumes.

Calzaghe didn't defeat a fellow dominant fighter - perhaps not his own fault, the division lacked star appeal and natural talent, and Ottke wasn't exactly begging Joe to come over.

Good posts by both of you.

Yeah your correct Terry, it wasn't an earth shattering performance. I thought it was very impressive but it wasn't earth shattering. I do actually have this feeling that what we will have from Ward is some consistently quality performances. I have the feeling that there is alot more to come, but he is not the type of boxer to show it. I think he will grow into the belt like Tim Bradley did and I do think we have our new Super 6 favourite.

The point I was trying to make that even after the Calzaghe defeat was that Kessler was hyped at the heir apparent.... as a great in the making as the fighter that not only cemented Joe's legacy, but will continue to cement it.

Now it seems people are trying to tarnish this Ward performance by saying Kessler wasn't up for it, or Joe ruined him. I don't think this is the case.... I think Terry has got it spot on, and as the world now can agree with Terry - this does affect Joe's legacy. Just as Hopkins vs Pavlik enhanced it!