Posted: 18 Jun 2006, 11:08
Yeah, as does Calzaghe's haircut.lvlarc_uk wrote:We like to call it power with military precision![]()
Of course he beat Lacy with speed & accuracy, but power comes into equation too.
Yeah, as does Calzaghe's haircut.lvlarc_uk wrote:We like to call it power with military precision![]()
Of course he beat Lacy with speed & accuracy, but power comes into equation too.
With "distance" very large, even good "force" translates at best into medicore "power" - according to your formula...lvlarc_uk wrote:Power equals Force(Joe's unhuman like strength) over distance(millisecond accuracy punches)
Can't argue with that.![]()
Of course I am kiddin'![]()
Only because Kessler has the WBA belt.viciousmaussa wrote:so, when Kessler beats Beyer, will he get his props over here?
Saying Mundine could've beaten Kessler can be countered by Reid could've beaten Calzaghe if he hadn't fannied about over the first 3 rds.
ppl want to deny Kessler, but come on, he's the only natural foe for Calzaghe
Max Molyneux wrote:Only because Kessler has the WBA belt.viciousmaussa wrote:so, when Kessler beats Beyer, will he get his props over here?
Saying Mundine could've beaten Kessler can be countered by Reid could've beaten Calzaghe if he hadn't fannied about over the first 3 rds.
ppl want to deny Kessler, but come on, he's the only natural foe for Calzaghe
He's only thought of Seriously by the more hardcore fans.
if you're very excitable, it is. it was a highly anticipated unification. if you're less excitable, it's the biggest since Ottke-Mitchell.pundit wrote:Max Molyneux wrote:Only because Kessler has the WBA belt.viciousmaussa wrote:so, when Kessler beats Beyer, will he get his props over here?
Saying Mundine could've beaten Kessler can be countered by Reid could've beaten Calzaghe if he hadn't fannied about over the first 3 rds.
ppl want to deny Kessler, but come on, he's the only natural foe for Calzaghe
He's only thought of Seriously by the more hardcore fans.
.... which tend to be the more knowledgeable ones (i.e., the ones you can't sell Calzaghe-Lacy as the greatst 168 fight since Jones-Toney).
OK. Maybe "Lacy-Calzaghe shouldn't be mentoined in the same phrase with Jones-Toney" says it better.viciousmaussa wrote:if you're very excitable, it is. it was a highly anticipated unification. if you're less excitable, it's the biggest since Ottke-Mitchell.pundit wrote:Max Molyneux wrote: Only because Kessler has the WBA belt.
He's only thought of Seriously by the more hardcore fans.
.... which tend to be the more knowledgeable ones (i.e., the ones you can't sell Calzaghe-Lacy as the greatst 168 fight since Jones-Toney).
being British, there was a lot of anticipation from my part for Calzaghe-Lacy. and i guess for the yanks that agreed with Iole that Lacy "could be the next de la hoya" (lol) it was a very big fight
Toney would of been too weight drained or fat to ever beat Calzaghe. :Ppundit wrote:OK. Maybe "Lacy-Calzaghe shouldn't be mentoined in the same phrase with Jones-Toney" says it better.viciousmaussa wrote:if you're very excitable, it is. it was a highly anticipated unification. if you're less excitable, it's the biggest since Ottke-Mitchell.pundit wrote:
.... which tend to be the more knowledgeable ones (i.e., the ones you can't sell Calzaghe-Lacy as the greatst 168 fight since Jones-Toney).
being British, there was a lot of anticipation from my part for Calzaghe-Lacy. and i guess for the yanks that agreed with Iole that Lacy "could be the next de la hoya" (lol) it was a very big fight