BoxRec

Spud wrote:

John Dillinger wrote:There's often talk on here about the quality of opponents that JC faced prior to Lacy. I don't think anyone can question Woodhall, Reid, Mitchell or Brewer. They were solid ex champs, Reid and Brewer carried on at a high level for some time afterwards.

Equally there's no doubt Pudwill and MCintyre were poor. But most of the others on JC's record look to me in hindsight to be decent names. Thorberry went onto to take Ottke to points and lost to Mundine. Shieka later fought Ottke I think and Beyer and Brewer. Starie fought Ottke.Salem had just lost to viet and went on to fight Bute. Veit later beat Brewer and Braehmer.

Yes there have been some very average defences eg Ashira, Jiminez but on the whole it's not a bad list.

First line said it all - ex world champs who were past their best - and you picked out the best of his opposition.

The first real quality fighter Calzaghe fought in his prime was Kessler and props to him for winning that fight.

Would Calzaghe have beaten a prime RJJ?

Would Calzaghe have beaten a prime Tarver??

Would Calzaghe have beaten a prime Bernard Hopkins??

RJJ: Unlikely, but RJJ at his prime was one of the best I have ever seen
Tarver: Defo
Hopkins: Yes, I think probably.

Even though he may not have won all three, he would still belong in the elite class of fighter.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

mike john wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: Echols ko'd Brewer in 3 a year before Calazage fought Brewer

Stylistically Mundine and Vanderpool would be very tricky for Calzage by matching him for speed and both were top5 and calling him out several years ago. I realise Lacy and Kessler beat those 2 but styles make fights

Like I said Calazage would be favourate against all BUT he didnt want to risk the chance of a defeat

if you saw the echols brewer fight, you'll know the stoppage was premature after charles had his guy down numerous times. styles do indeed make fights, but the knock on calzaghe is the lack of p4p names, future hall of famers, elite opponents on his resume. of course fighters like mundine are decent. decent names arent what joe is said to be lacking

Actually I thought the knock on him was he had too many worthless fights, too many fighters at the tail end of their careers, and a load of wasted time

Lets assess Calazages career in the years hes fought:

1998 waste of a year,
1999-2000 good years,
2001 completely wasted year
2002 wasted year
2003 decent year
2004-2005 piss poor years
2006-2008 excellent period

5 years on his record have been complete piss about years and he could have been facing mundine, beyer, vanderpool, ottke, green, froch, echols in that time frame. He should have fought Glen Johnson when he has the chance too

I'm on a mission with this thread!

You could pick apart most fighter's records like that - including some of those on that British all time top ten thread that is being run.

Plus, all you people knocking him for not chasing, or even ducking, some fights need to acknowledge one thing....

IF this did happen, it probably had more to do with his promoter than him. Joe is not the type to duck anybody.....

I think some of you would never be satisfied. Loads of you predicted he would lose to Lacy and Kessler because he was a padded fighter - but as soon as he beats them, suddenly they weren't world class fighters.

Those criticising him - please go on record now to say who he has to beat to prove himself... Then, if he does it, no backtracking....

Maelstrom wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

mike john wrote: if you saw the echols brewer fight, you'll know the stoppage was premature after charles had his guy down numerous times. styles do indeed make fights, but the knock on calzaghe is the lack of p4p names, future hall of famers, elite opponents on his resume. of course fighters like mundine are decent. decent names arent what joe is said to be lacking

Actually I thought the knock on him was he had too many worthless fights, too many fighters at the tail end of their careers, and a load of wasted time

Lets assess Calazages career in the years hes fought:

1998 waste of a year,
1999-2000 good years,
2001 completely wasted year
2002 wasted year
2003 decent year
2004-2005 piss poor years
2006-2008 excellent period

5 years on his record have been complete piss about years and he could have been facing mundine, beyer, vanderpool, ottke, green, froch, echols in that time frame. He should have fought Glen Johnson when he has the chance too

I'm on a mission with this thread!

You could pick apart most fighter's records like that - including some of those on that British all time top ten thread that is being run.

Plus, all you people knocking him for not chasing, or even ducking, some fights need to acknowledge one thing....

IF this did happen, it probably had more to do with his promoter than him. Joe is not the type to duck anybody.....

I think some of you would never be satisfied. Loads of you predicted he would lose to Lacy and Kessler because he was a padded fighter - but as soon as he beats them, suddenly they weren't world class fighters.

Those criticising him - please go on record now to say who he has to beat to prove himself... Then, if he does it, no backtracking....

FYI I picked Joe to beat BHOPs, Kessler, Lacy and rate him as an excellent fighter, just not as good as Jones Jr and BHOPS. This is not a hate post, its the truth about his career which by some gets made into something greater than it is.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

mike john wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: Echols ko'd Brewer in 3 a year before Calazage fought Brewer

Stylistically Mundine and Vanderpool would be very tricky for Calzage by matching him for speed and both were top5 and calling him out several years ago. I realise Lacy and Kessler beat those 2 but styles make fights

Like I said Calazage would be favourate against all BUT he didnt want to risk the chance of a defeat

if you saw the echols brewer fight, you'll know the stoppage was premature after charles had his guy down numerous times. styles do indeed make fights, but the knock on calzaghe is the lack of p4p names, future hall of famers, elite opponents on his resume. of course fighters like mundine are decent. decent names arent what joe is said to be lacking

Actually I thought the knock on him was he had too many worthless fights, too many fighters at the tail end of their careers, and a load of wasted time

Lets assess Calazages career in the years hes fought:

1998 waste of a year,
1999-2000 good years,
2001 completely wasted year
2002 wasted year
2003 decent year
2004-2005 piss poor years
2006-2008 excellent period

5 years on his record have been complete piss about years and he could have been facing mundine, beyer, vanderpool, ottke, green, froch, echols in that time frame. He should have fought Glen Johnson when he has the chance too

He fought ONCE in 2003... not a decent year to me!

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

Maelstrom wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: Actually I thought the knock on him was he had too many worthless fights, too many fighters at the tail end of their careers, and a load of wasted time

Lets assess Calazages career in the years hes fought:

1998 waste of a year,
1999-2000 good years,
2001 completely wasted year
2002 wasted year
2003 decent year
2004-2005 piss poor years
2006-2008 excellent period

5 years on his record have been complete piss about years and he could have been facing mundine, beyer, vanderpool, ottke, green, froch, echols in that time frame. He should have fought Glen Johnson when he has the chance too

I'm on a mission with this thread!

You could pick apart most fighter's records like that - including some of those on that British all time top ten thread that is being run.

Plus, all you people knocking him for not chasing, or even ducking, some fights need to acknowledge one thing....

IF this did happen, it probably had more to do with his promoter than him. Joe is not the type to duck anybody.....

I think some of you would never be satisfied. Loads of you predicted he would lose to Lacy and Kessler because he was a padded fighter - but as soon as he beats them, suddenly they weren't world class fighters.

Those criticising him - please go on record now to say who he has to beat to prove himself... Then, if he does it, no backtracking....

FYI I picked Joe to beat BHOPs, Kessler, Lacy and rate him as an excellent fighter, just not as good as Jones Jr and BHOPS. This is not a hate post, its the truth about his career which by some gets made into something greater than it is.

Yes Joe has admitted in the past that Roy Jones was one fighter he didnt want to face bacause he was just so good. But in his pomp Roy Jones really was a great fighter - as in all-time great. Joe is a modern day great fighter but doesnt compare with a peak RJJ in my opinion.

Maelstrom wrote:

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:Regarding Ottke, he was offered 1,000,000 (I presume that was £, but not sure) apparently but the fight had to be in the UK.

And that is an understandable demand. Why would Calzaghe risk everything fighting Ottke when he knew he would get jobbed if he didn't get the stoppage.

How much worst is Germany than the Uk or any other country for that matter? There is Robin Reid, Mads Larsen who can feel aggrieved.... Reid via the ref, Larsen the judges.... aside from that Ottke deserved every decision - and even got a Split decision in a fight he completely controlled, meaning that those who haven't seen it - thinking he must have got a gift.

Michaelsweki lost a close on to Gonzales, many thought he won.

Henry Maske deserved didn't get the decision vs Hill.

Every place has their bad/controvesial decisions.

Woods vs Johnson 1 (far out bad) and 3 (a fair few thought a draw or Johnson). Brodie vs Chi 1 (bad), Dunne vs Jacobs (outrageous), the scorecard for Power vs Munyai 1 - before the KO (outrageous).

Plus if you have Terry O Conner, or John Keane as the ref - then Ottke might have got stopped for simply electing to go backwards.

Of Course Germany has a reputation, and of course Joe was right in his beliefs... I would have adviced him the exact same thing. But to make Ottke as the bad guy cause he wouldn't fight in the "fair" UK is a bit much. He had justification to think he'd get jobbed also.