BoxRec

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

Dioufy wrote:I would love to see Calzaghe/Hopkins II, partly because I enjoyed it, but if Joe did take on Hopkins in Wales and won more convincingly then that would eradicate question marks on their first fight, which I though Hopkins just about nicked.

I've told you to watch the drinking, Dioufy.. :)

Captain Hook wrote:

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

Pascal's a good fighter. Had a very good win, one sided over Kingsley Ikeke. That's the kind of fights we need, Froch v Pascal, two evenly matched hungry fighters, on the way up, who really want the belt.

Superfight for Joe? He's never had a superfight. Superfight would have been when Hopkins or Jones were ranked p4p #1 or #2. Though I concede that Lacy and Kessler fights were massive events over here.

Autobarn wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

Pascal's a good fighter. Had a very good win, one sided over Kingsley Ikeke. That's the kind of fights we need, Froch v Pascal, two evenly matched hungry fighters, on the way up, who really want the belt.

Superfight for Joe? He's never had a superfight. Superfight would have been when Hopkins or Jones were ranked p4p #1 or #2. Though I concede that Lacy and Kessler fights were massive events over here.

Indeed.

You'd think that they would have got away with calling the RJJ-JOE "Bout" a "Super-Fight". The PPV Flop obviously proved their naive little minds wrong.

Potentially though, like you sad, Calzaghe could have had huge "Super-Fights" against Hopkins and RJJ back in 2001-2002.
Instead he waited a few years, and fought, yes you guessed it, Lacy then few years later, Kessler.

What was he thinking

yep, refused to take the risk, then waited for less experienced fighters Lacy/Kessler to take the risk in order to add meaning (and money) to their title runs.

i think this marred Joe as a fighter a bit. He still looks technically unfinished going by the Jones and Hopkins fights, there are silly ahots that he still can't avoid etc etc. If Tarver somehow beats Dawson, I would wager that Joe gets knocked down before wearing down Tarver with his relative youth and stamina.

Still he's got his unbeaten record and his American money. He succeeded on his own terms. It's just so obvious that he's been matched to avoid the scary L as long as possible, which IMO shows a lot of insecurity. He was WBO cretin for many years, the very thing he said he wasn't going to be.

Captain Hook wrote:

Dioufy wrote:I would love to see Calzaghe/Hopkins II, partly because I enjoyed it, but if Joe did take on Hopkins in Wales and won more convincingly then that would eradicate question marks on their first fight, which I though Hopkins just about nicked.

I've told you to watch the drinking, Dioufy.. :)

Come to think of it, I was hammered come 4-30am on that specific day.

Autobarn wrote:yep, refused to take the risk, then waited for less experienced fighters Lacy/Kessler to take the risk in order to add meaning (and money) to their title runs.

i think this marred Joe as a fighter a bit. He still looks technically unfinished going by the Jones and Hopkins fights, there are silly ahots that he still can't avoid etc etc. If Tarver somehow beats Dawson, I would wager that Joe gets knocked down before wearing down Tarver with his relative youth and stamina.

Still he's got his unbeaten record and his American money. He succeeded on his own terms. It's just so obvious that he's been matched to avoid the scary L as long as possible, which IMO shows a lot of insecurity. He was WBO cretin for many years, the very thing he said he wasn't going to be.

The problem is you use phrases like "it's obvious", when you actually don't know.
Why do you always believe that it was Calzaghe who refused to take the risk? Hopkins turned the fight down, Jones was on a different level. Fights like that only opened up after Lacy. Stop trying to rewrite history. What is probably more likely is that Sky didn't believe in him and wouldn't put up the money. After all, they refused to show the second Calzaghe-Veit fight even though it would have been a cheap feed from Germany. The PPV in the US wasn't great but it did a lot more than Hopkins-Pavlik.

As for a superfight would have to be PFP 1 or 2, Hopkins is rated No 4 by The Ring now and No 3 by BoxingTalk and No 2 by boxrec. Calzaghe is 3, 1 and 1 by those three.

Observer - When Jones was light heavy, Hopkins was middleweight and JC was super middle?

I don't remember the clamouring for him to drop his title and move up or down being that strong.

Captain Hook wrote:Observer - When Jones was light heavy, Hopkins was middleweight and JC was super middle?

I don't remember the clamouring for him to drop his title and move up or down being that strong.

Moving down was never an option because he struggled to make super-middle. Hopkins, as has been recorded elsewhere, accepted a fight with Calzaghe and then changed his mind, deciding instead to stay at home and concentrate on smaller guys (Trinidad, De La Hoya).
Jones would not have been interested in a Calzaghe fight. While Jones was generally regarded as PFP No 1, he didn't actually have that many big fights at around this time. He didn't box in Vegas between the Toney fight in 1994 and Ruiz in 2003 and he didn't box at the Garden in that time either. Why? It's probably about money. HBO's deal with Jones would have given him so much money and he hand-picked the opposition.
As the bigger draw, it would have been up to Jones to pick a fight with Calzaghe, but I am sure Autobarn or Observer have no proof that there ever was an offer. Ducking or avoiding hints that there was an opportunity, not just some bland "he should have gone to America" crap.
But that is the real world, something some people on here obviously don't live in.

Captain Hook wrote:

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

A limited Pascal?

Pascal had speed decent power and very decent skills.

DG. wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

A limited Pascal?

Pascal had speed decent power and very decent skills.

Yes Dennis, but sadly DECENT is not good enough to make a world champion, unless you're a heavyweight.

I'm a decent cook but I won't be opening my own restaurant...

PS Good post Gobbles...

gobbles wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:Observer - When Jones was light heavy, Hopkins was middleweight and JC was super middle?

I don't remember the clamouring for him to drop his title and move up or down being that strong.

Moving down was never an option because he struggled to make super-middle. Hopkins, as has been recorded elsewhere, accepted a fight with Calzaghe and then changed his mind, deciding instead to stay at home and concentrate on smaller guys (Trinidad, De La Hoya).
Jones would not have been interested in a Calzaghe fight. While Jones was generally regarded as PFP No 1, he didn't actually have that many big fights at around this time. He didn't box in Vegas between the Toney fight in 1994 and Ruiz in 2003 and he didn't box at the Garden in that time either. Why? It's probably about money. HBO's deal with Jones would have given him so much money and he hand-picked the opposition.
As the bigger draw, it would have been up to Jones to pick a fight with Calzaghe, but I am sure Autobarn or Observer have no proof that there ever was an offer. Ducking or avoiding hints that there was an opportunity, not just some bland "he should have gone to America" crap.
But that is the real world, something some people on here obviously don't live in.

Listen, just fornicate off will you.. Its blindingly obvious that Joe Calzaghe ducked Jones and Hopkins 5 years ago and is ducking Carl Froch now and if he wants to cement his legacy he should fight Zsolt Erdei or Denis Inkin

Thank you

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

gobbles wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:Observer - When Jones was light heavy, Hopkins was middleweight and JC was super middle?

I don't remember the clamouring for him to drop his title and move up or down being that strong.

Moving down was never an option because he struggled to make super-middle. Hopkins, as has been recorded elsewhere, accepted a fight with Calzaghe and then changed his mind, deciding instead to stay at home and concentrate on smaller guys (Trinidad, De La Hoya).
Jones would not have been interested in a Calzaghe fight. While Jones was generally regarded as PFP No 1, he didn't actually have that many big fights at around this time. He didn't box in Vegas between the Toney fight in 1994 and Ruiz in 2003 and he didn't box at the Garden in that time either. Why? It's probably about money. HBO's deal with Jones would have given him so much money and he hand-picked the opposition.
As the bigger draw, it would have been up to Jones to pick a fight with Calzaghe, but I am sure Autobarn or Observer have no proof that there ever was an offer. Ducking or avoiding hints that there was an opportunity, not just some bland "he should have gone to America" crap.
But that is the real world, something some people on here obviously don't live in.

Listen, just eff off will you.. Its blindingly obvious that Joe Calzaghe ducked Jones and Hopkins 5 years ago and is ducking Carl Froch now and if he wants to cement his legacy he should fight Zsolt Erdei or Denis Inkin

Thank you

Behave you mug, Dennis Inkin :)

Have you been sniffing glue again......even you don't believe that!

Gobbles are you seriously suggesting that Sky thought Veit was going to win the rematch?

The reason why that wasn't shown live on Sky is that 1) Warren didn't win purse pids, Joe therefore getting a much better pay day than normal so therefore it would have cost Sky alot more than usual and it was a mismatch a forgone conclusion 2) Warren's relationship with Sky was on the wain, highlights of the fight were shown on ITV as part of Khan vs Kindalen 3 (I think) which pretty much marked the end of Warren and Sky for the time being.

Nothing cause Sky didn't believe in Joe.

Same old rubbish being spouted on here... When the few shite talking critics are actually pushed to come up with these mythical names that Joe Calzaghe has dodged, we get the same old crap - either fighters in different divisions, fighters who were nothing special and are lesser than many of the better names on Calzaghe's resume, blah blah blah. Then RJJ and Hopkins are mentioned - different weights, and more importantly, both arguably ducked Calzaghe. It is common knowledge that Hopkins pulled out of the fight scheduled years ago and as for Jones, he himself referenced at the press conference months ago that they would have fought years ago had it not been for their managers.

You armchair so-called experts don't seem to realise that all these fighters have heart, they are brave, proud and arrogant. There is a difference between fights not being made because of politics and because a fighter is petrified.

Truth is, he's done himself and his country proud - he's unified, he's had all the belts, he's undefeated. The likes of Benn even go on record to say that Joe would have beat the likes of himself, Eubank and Watson had he been around a little earlier. He has nothing else to prove. His defining fight was against Kessler, who you all said he was too scared to fight lol (just like Lacy). These days it is a complete rarity to get two undefeated champions in the same division putting it all on the line. I dont give a shit whether that fight fits into your technical criteria for a superfight, I dont care whether the US were interested or not - the fight was huge simply in terms of two talented same division champs aiming to be number one. Forget all these so-called past it legends who lose to each other over and over again. Kessler will go on to be a dominant champ, and Joe's fight against him was defining.

It makes me laugh when so many of you were spitting your dummies out because he fought Bika, saying that it was a disgrace - when clearly Bika was a decent intermediary fight after Lacy, Bika was strong, dangerous and can handle himself at world level - thus it was a legitimate fight. But what happens is some of you prats come onto this forum, talking about how crap Bika is, and the rest follow suit who have never probably even seen Bika fight before the Joe fight. Likewise, times goes by and people's memories and opinions change again, and now Bika is considered half decent!

And dont get me started on Lacy... all you turn coats, banging on about Joe avoiding him, then the fight gets scheduled and Joe's gunna get hammered. Result comes and surprise surprise, Lacy was over rated.

The one you all struggle to criticise though is Kessler, cos you can't, so instead you start drivelling rubbish about it not being a super fight in some childish attempt to undermine or negate its worth.

And do the hundreds of world champs who have gone before get this level of petty critiscism in terms of who they have fought and not fought...? You can make the same arguments about them all. You lot love to mention Pudwell, who Otke also fought if I am not mistaken. Difference with many other champs past and present when compared to Calzaghe is that Joe has remained undefeated, has unified and claimed every belt. All that aside, he's more talented than most.

You know I saw someone on here the other day inferring that while Hatton is motivated to chase the top P4P fighters, that Calzaghe is scared to! Despite the fact that at Hatton's level his main foe is the P4P no. 1 and that previous to retiring, Mayweather was the no. 1. Where as Calzaghe has zero fighters above him in terms of P4P ratings. No one. Thus, these mythical top four P4P fighters cannot be targetted or indeed ducked - cos they do not exist. That exemplifies the level of bullshit spouted on here I think.

People talk about Hopkins being a legend, what a load of billocks - yes he is talented, athletic, super fit. But he is one deminsional in his style of fighting. He opts for spoiling and non-boxing tactics to help him steal wins on points. Horrible to watch a fighter clinging on, pot shotting, headbutting, elbowing, pretending to be hurt, all with the aim of trying to get to the end with more points. Thats not boxing and its not fighting. That's why Hopkins has about 4 or 5 losses on his record. A lazy past it Eastman illustrated his limitations. The truth is that had Hopkins been more aggressive when he fought Joe, there would have simply been more opennings for Joe, more scope for fluency - it would have simply meant an emphatic victory for Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has it all - versatility, speed, inteligence, heart, stamina, chin, and in days gone by, plenty of power.

fist wrote:Same old rubbish being spouted on here... When the few shite talking critics are actually pushed to come up with these mythical names that Joe Calzaghe has dodged, we get the same old crap - either fighters in different divisions, fighters who were nothing special and are lesser than many of the better names on Calzaghe's resume, blah blah blah. Then RJJ and Hopkins are mentioned - different weights, and more importantly, both arguably ducked Calzaghe. It is common knowledge that Hopkins pulled out of the fight scheduled years ago and as for Jones, he himself referenced at the press conference months ago that they would have fought years ago had it not been for their managers.

You armchair so-called experts don't seem to realise that all these fighters have heart, they are brave, proud and arrogant. There is a difference between fights not being made because of politics and because a fighter is petrified.

Truth is, he's done himself and his country proud - he's unified, he's had all the belts, he's undefeated. The likes of Benn even go on record to say that Joe would have beat the likes of himself, Eubank and Watson had he been around a little earlier. He has nothing else to prove. His defining fight was against Kessler, who you all said he was too scared to fight lol (just like Lacy). These days it is a complete rarity to get two undefeated champions in the same division putting it all on the line. I dont give a shit whether that fight fits into your technical criteria for a superfight, I dont care whether the US were interested or not - the fight was huge simply in terms of two talented same division champs aiming to be number one. Forget all these so-called past it legends who lose to each other over and over again. Kessler will go on to be a dominant champ, and Joe's fight against him was defining.

It makes me laugh when so many of you were spitting your dummies out because he fought Bika, saying that it was a disgrace - when clearly Bika was a decent intermediary fight after Lacy, Bika was strong, dangerous and can handle himself at world level - thus it was a legitimate fight. But what happens is some of you prats come onto this forum, talking about how crap Bika is, and the rest follow suit who have never probably even seen Bika fight before the Joe fight. Likewise, times goes by and people's memories and opinions change again, and now Bika is considered half decent!

And dont get me started on Lacy... all you turn coats, banging on about Joe avoiding him, then the fight gets scheduled and Joe's gunna get hammered. Result comes and surprise surprise, Lacy was over rated.

The one you all struggle to criticise though is Kessler, cos you can't, so instead you start drivelling rubbish about it not being a super fight in some childish attempt to undermine or negate its worth.

And do the hundreds of world champs who have gone before get this level of petty critiscism in terms of who they have fought and not fought...? You can make the same arguments about them all. You lot love to mention Pudwell, who Otke also fought if I am not mistaken. Difference with many other champs past and present when compared to Calzaghe is that Joe has remained undefeated, has unified and claimed every belt. All that aside, he's more talented than most.

You know I saw someone on here the other day inferring that while Hatton is motivated to chase the top P4P fighters, that Calzaghe is scared to! Despite the fact that at Hatton's level his main foe is the P4P no. 1 and that previous to retiring, Mayweather was the no. 1. Where as Calzaghe has zero fighters above him in terms of P4P ratings. No one. Thus, these mythical top four P4P fighters cannot be targetted or indeed ducked - cos they do not exist. That exemplifies the level of bullshit spouted on here I think.

People talk about Hopkins being a legend, what a load of billocks - yes he is talented, athletic, super fit. But he is one deminsional in his style of fighting. He opts for spoiling and non-boxing tactics to help him steal wins on points. Horrible to watch a fighter clinging on, pot shotting, headbutting, elbowing, pretending to be hurt, all with the aim of trying to get to the end with more points. Thats not boxing and its not fighting. That's why Hopkins has about 4 or 5 losses on his record. A lazy past it Eastman illustrated his limitations. The truth is that had Hopkins been more aggressive when he fought Joe, there would have simply been more opennings for Joe, more scope for fluency - it would have simply meant an emphatic victory for Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has it all - versatility, speed, inteligence, heart, stamina, chin, and in days gone by, plenty of power.

I agree with alot of this post, yes I do - except really two points.

1) Re the Hatton vs Joe P4P thing... you have made your point, yes there is none around at Light Heavy above Joe - although Hopkins remains close, Pavlik was close, Roy Jones WAS ahead of him as possibly was Dariusz, Toney, Wright and Sven at certain stages of Joe's career. Hatton could have not fought FMM and waited for him to retire or something and then claim the same thing that Joe has done - no one around. Dawson must be lurking in or around the top 5 now - wins over Johnson, Tarver and the ring magazine Cruiserweight king isn't bad.

2) Obviously your points on Hopkins are valid(ish) for Hopkins post 2003... completely wrong for Hopkins pre 2003. I think Hopkins is the very essense of not being a one dimensional fighter.

How did Eastman show his limitation it was like 118-110 to Hopkins, being kind to Howard.

As for a more agressive Hopkins would have been easier for Calzaghe, well I guess we will never know for sure - personally I thought Hopkins was faster, hit harder (or punches had more effect) and more accurate than Joe and a more agressive Hopkins (and fitter) would have won comfortably... but we will never know. However, Hopkins did enough as it was to make Calzaghe look very average at times and even Joe has gone on record in saying the fight was very tight and he can see why people have scored it for Hopkins. I think that is as close to an admission as we are going to get.

DG. wrote:
Pascal had very decent skills.

Yeah it's just a shame he didn't show them in the Froch fight, were he looked more of a limited slugger.

gobbles wrote:

Autobarn wrote:yep, refused to take the risk, then waited for less experienced fighters Lacy/Kessler to take the risk in order to add meaning (and money) to their title runs.

i think this marred Joe as a fighter a bit. He still looks technically unfinished going by the Jones and Hopkins fights, there are silly ahots that he still can't avoid etc etc. If Tarver somehow beats Dawson, I would wager that Joe gets knocked down before wearing down Tarver with his relative youth and stamina.

Still he's got his unbeaten record and his American money. He succeeded on his own terms. It's just so obvious that he's been matched to avoid the scary L as long as possible, which IMO shows a lot of insecurity. He was WBO cretin for many years, the very thing he said he wasn't going to be.

The problem is you use phrases like "it's obvious", when you actually don't know.
Why do you always believe that it was Calzaghe who refused to take the risk? Hopkins turned the fight down, Jones was on a different level. Fights like that only opened up after Lacy. Stop trying to rewrite history. What is probably more likely is that Sky didn't believe in him and wouldn't put up the money. After all, they refused to show the second Calzaghe-Veit fight even though it would have been a cheap feed from Germany. The PPV in the US wasn't great but it did a lot more than Hopkins-Pavlik.

As for a superfight would have to be PFP 1 or 2, Hopkins is rated No 4 by The Ring now and No 3 by BoxingTalk and No 2 by boxrec. Calzaghe is 3, 1 and 1 by those three.

I think in the bad years, some big concerted effort could have been made. The Mario Veit 2, and Evans Ashira years. The good old days! Joe did leave it a bit late, but the Lacy and Kessler fights were admittedly brilliant performances. Did they make up for the past, or should we always hold the shitty defences against him etc.

No one's rewriting history. If you're an unbeaten Brit with a title, not that many want to come over here, and will be content to challenge elsewhere. Ok, Warren and Joe got Reid, Brewer etc when they were easier to deal with, very sound business sense; also when they had become retreads.

I reckon it was Showtime that didn't believe in him. Larkin made a few comments, seemed to make it clear that Joe wouldn't be fighting any big fights any time soon. Whose fault was it though, following sloppy wins over Starie and Reid?

When a fight with Hopkins in America is made when Hopkins is 43, just after a bad performance, then it's "obvious" the fight has been made at the right time - the time when the fihgt is less losable.

fist wrote:Same old rubbish being spouted on here... When the few shite talking critics are actually pushed to come up with these mythical names that Joe Calzaghe has dodged, we get the same old crap - either fighters in different divisions, fighters who were nothing special and are lesser than many of the better names on Calzaghe's resume, blah blah blah. Then RJJ and Hopkins are mentioned - different weights, and more importantly, both arguably ducked Calzaghe. It is common knowledge that Hopkins pulled out of the fight scheduled years ago and as for Jones, he himself referenced at the press conference months ago that they would have fought years ago had it not been for their managers.

You armchair so-called experts don't seem to realise that all these fighters have heart, they are brave, proud and arrogant. There is a difference between fights not being made because of politics and because a fighter is petrified.

Truth is, he's done himself and his country proud - he's unified, he's had all the belts, he's undefeated. The likes of Benn even go on record to say that Joe would have beat the likes of himself, Eubank and Watson had he been around a little earlier. He has nothing else to prove. His defining fight was against Kessler, who you all said he was too scared to fight lol (just like Lacy). These days it is a complete rarity to get two undefeated champions in the same division putting it all on the line. I dont give a shit whether that fight fits into your technical criteria for a superfight, I dont care whether the US were interested or not - the fight was huge simply in terms of two talented same division champs aiming to be number one. Forget all these so-called past it legends who lose to each other over and over again. Kessler will go on to be a dominant champ, and Joe's fight against him was defining.

It makes me laugh when so many of you were spitting your dummies out because he fought Bika, saying that it was a disgrace - when clearly Bika was a decent intermediary fight after Lacy, Bika was strong, dangerous and can handle himself at world level - thus it was a legitimate fight. But what happens is some of you prats come onto this forum, talking about how crap Bika is, and the rest follow suit who have never probably even seen Bika fight before the Joe fight. Likewise, times goes by and people's memories and opinions change again, and now Bika is considered half decent!

And dont get me started on Lacy... all you turn coats, banging on about Joe avoiding him, then the fight gets scheduled and Joe's gunna get hammered. Result comes and surprise surprise, Lacy was over rated.

The one you all struggle to criticise though is Kessler, cos you can't, so instead you start drivelling rubbish about it not being a super fight in some childish attempt to undermine or negate its worth.

And do the hundreds of world champs who have gone before get this level of petty critiscism in terms of who they have fought and not fought...? You can make the same arguments about them all. You lot love to mention Pudwell, who Otke also fought if I am not mistaken. Difference with many other champs past and present when compared to Calzaghe is that Joe has remained undefeated, has unified and claimed every belt. All that aside, he's more talented than most.

You know I saw someone on here the other day inferring that while Hatton is motivated to chase the top P4P fighters, that Calzaghe is scared to! Despite the fact that at Hatton's level his main foe is the P4P no. 1 and that previous to retiring, Mayweather was the no. 1. Where as Calzaghe has zero fighters above him in terms of P4P ratings. No one. Thus, these mythical top four P4P fighters cannot be targetted or indeed ducked - cos they do not exist. That exemplifies the level of bullshit spouted on here I think.

People talk about Hopkins being a legend, what a load of billocks - yes he is talented, athletic, super fit. But he is one deminsional in his style of fighting. He opts for spoiling and non-boxing tactics to help him steal wins on points. Horrible to watch a fighter clinging on, pot shotting, headbutting, elbowing, pretending to be hurt, all with the aim of trying to get to the end with more points. Thats not boxing and its not fighting. That's why Hopkins has about 4 or 5 losses on his record. A lazy past it Eastman illustrated his limitations. The truth is that had Hopkins been more aggressive when he fought Joe, there would have simply been more opennings for Joe, more scope for fluency - it would have simply meant an emphatic victory for Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has it all - versatility, speed, inteligence, heart, stamina, chin, and in days gone by, plenty of power.

Plenty of power?

Joe's career was looking terrible up to early 2006.

Then he slapped an American 1000 times - pre requisite for stardom! - and then beat Kessler - fantastic, super!

Then he had that unclassifiable fight with Hopkins of 43 yo, and that toss off with Jones where his conduct was closer to Walsh bros than World Champion, and a lot of ppl don't know what to think. Some may e starting to think if he was so fvcking amazing, why did he get dropped, why didn't he look better etc. Maybe, Versatile Joe can't fight a counter puncher?

DG. wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:

forcefraser wrote:There is only one fight out there for Calzaghe and that be Big Cobra Froch.

Eh? BIG COBRA took big hooks all bloody night v a limited Pascal. Until then I had him v Calzaghe as 50/50...

JC is only going to have a superfight........there aren't any left. There are no marquee names....the only possibles are Dawson and Hopkins 2 (Zzzzzzzzz)

A limited Pascal?

Pascal had speed decent power and very decent skills.

No stamina, though, that's why Froch gambled on a fast pace.

Autobarn wrote:

gobbles wrote:

Autobarn wrote:yep, refused to take the risk, then waited for less experienced fighters Lacy/Kessler to take the risk in order to add meaning (and money) to their title runs.

i think this marred Joe as a fighter a bit. He still looks technically unfinished going by the Jones and Hopkins fights, there are silly ahots that he still can't avoid etc etc. If Tarver somehow beats Dawson, I would wager that Joe gets knocked down before wearing down Tarver with his relative youth and stamina.

Still he's got his unbeaten record and his American money. He succeeded on his own terms. It's just so obvious that he's been matched to avoid the scary L as long as possible, which IMO shows a lot of insecurity. He was WBO cretin for many years, the very thing he said he wasn't going to be.

The problem is you use phrases like "it's obvious", when you actually don't know.
Why do you always believe that it was Calzaghe who refused to take the risk? Hopkins turned the fight down, Jones was on a different level. Fights like that only opened up after Lacy. Stop trying to rewrite history. What is probably more likely is that Sky didn't believe in him and wouldn't put up the money. After all, they refused to show the second Calzaghe-Veit fight even though it would have been a cheap feed from Germany. The PPV in the US wasn't great but it did a lot more than Hopkins-Pavlik.

As for a superfight would have to be PFP 1 or 2, Hopkins is rated No 4 by The Ring now and No 3 by BoxingTalk and No 2 by boxrec. Calzaghe is 3, 1 and 1 by those three.

I think in the bad years, some big concerted effort could have been made. The Mario Veit 2, and Evans Ashira years. The good old days! Joe did leave it a bit late, but the Lacy and Kessler fights were admittedly brilliant performances. Did they make up for the past, or should we always hold the shitty defences against him etc.

No one's rewriting history. If you're an unbeaten Brit with a title, not that many want to come over here, and will be content to challenge elsewhere. Ok, Warren and Joe got Reid, Brewer etc when they were easier to deal with, very sound business sense; also when they had become retreads.

I reckon it was Showtime that didn't believe in him. Larkin made a few comments, seemed to make it clear that Joe wouldn't be fighting any big fights any time soon. Whose fault was it though, following sloppy wins over Starie and Reid?

When a fight with Hopkins in America is made when Hopkins is 43, just after a bad performance, then it's "obvious" the fight has been made at the right time - the time when the fihgt is less losable.

The Ashira fight was part of a row with Gary Shaw. Shaw insisted Lacy had a warm-up fight before Calzaghe, so Warren wanted one too so he wouldn't be inactive for ten months, but then broke his hand so it backfired.
I don't think they picked Hopkins off the back of a bad performance, he was picked no doubt because he was a big name and seen as beatable, but it was after wins over Tarver and Wright. And he was called out after Kessler, which is probably the first time Calzaghe was in a good bargaining position.

Yes that is true, only when Joe was undisputed champ was he really calling any shots. Should he have made a bigger effort earlier, so that he was in a better position to bargain, earlier on? The big man-nie, man-nie seems to mean a lot to Joe so why wasn't he trying to get it sooner?

I can't shake off SD, over 43 yo. If it had been sooner, it could well have gone the other way. Timing is everything in boxing and it just feels as though they made it at the right time. Of course there is the counter argument that if Hopkins was younger, he'd have taken more chances, and given Joe more openings etc etc.

It's a shame that Joe hadn't met many good counter punchers earlier on, because it seems that he still has some big holes in his game, some cracks we've only just been permitted to see. When Warren split with Joe, started spilling the beans etc, he mentioned Joe not liking movers, counter punchers - doesn't take a genius to figure that he was kept away from this type of challenger.

Joe and Jo-Emma were on TV last night on Fifth Gear. You can see it here: http://fifthgear.five.tv/jsp/5gmain.jsp ... e+Calzaghe

fist wrote:You armchair so-called experts don't seem to realise that all these fighters have heart, they are brave, proud and arrogant. There is a difference between fights not being made because of politics and because a fighter is petrified.

Fist first of - please do not be patronising - you mention "Armchair so called experts" - what is boxing without fans and what is boxing without people who have strong opinions!!!

In addition - although Calzaghe has proved beyond any reasonable doubt he is a genuine world class boxer and yes the UK as a whole should be very proud indeed of his achievements - there also can be no denying he could have made his achievements so much sooner - and please do not just blame the promoter in this case Mr W arren - There were times when Calzaghe did not need to resign for Mr W arren but its a simple fact that W arren paid Joe Calzaghe very well indeed for what were very easy defences of his WBO title.

When on a number of occasions Calzaghe's contract was up with W arren he could have stated he was not resigning or if he did he could have had significant clauses within his renewal which meant securing massive fights - but I get the impression Calzaghe in his own mind did not think he was ready for the genuine pound for pound massive fights despite the bravado to the contrary.

Calzaghe has achieved an awful lot - but he could have put beyond any doubt his status as the greatest boxer the UK has produced - he has not done that - that status has so many arguments to the contrary.

Its weird really whilst Calzaghe has achieved an awful lot - he could have done so much more and as such people have a right to voice their dissapointment in my view.

I agree, Spud'lington. Joe has amazing talent, but he left it too late to exploit it to its full capability.