BoxRec

Terence wrote:Joe is what 40 fights in and he has only fought one really meaningful fight (Brewer and Mitchell?! No). If people think that is a good solid career, well fair enough.

Nothing like a solid career. When you consider his talents his career has been more than disappointing. He still has time to correct it though another 3 or 4 big fights and wins could sort it all out.

Goose

Mundine, he should definately fight Mundine to sort his critics. Mundine has been champion before and nearly beat before getting KO'd by Sven Ottke but now is much more improved and a very strong, powerful and fast super Middle. GREAT FIGHT !!! I have seen the recent Mundine Vs the dangerous puncher Danny Green, and Mundine was very classy and sharp, his a definate danger man with a good punch. I would love to see this, I know Mundine's been asking for it he kept saying "I'll fight Calzaghe anywhere Australia or UK" Best fight for Calzaghe and a potential classic war. A Super Middle old school, not quite Benn Vs McClellan but close.

Warren isn't going to pay Mundine enough money to come over and fight when he can make more staying at home.

I think it's Woods/Johnson or nothing with regards his last big fight. Lacy will always be looked at as his standout fight in a career of what ifs? The only way he fights Kessler is if Beyer beats him.

Contrary to popular opinon I dont think Calzaghe v Johnson is a big fight. Johnson is having an indian summer at the moment but he's no elite level fighter. Just goes to show how poor 175 has been/is that he is considered in or around the number 1 spot at the weight.

Define 'elite level fighter' then. Johnson has knocked out Jones Jr, beaten Tarver, and has looked very good in his fights since, not to mention what should have been two wins over Woods, who in turn is looking very good.

He knocked out a shot to bits Jones and how good is Tarver really? He is living off beating the same faded Jones. Hopkins aged 41 and having not looked good in a long time moved up 2 weights and as good as shut him out. Johnson is flattered by the Jones and Tarver wins IMO, Tarver was never that good and Jones was shot to bits. Lets be honest nice as Woods is he is a European level fighter and Johnson only bested him 1 out of 2.

By big fight I mean the biggest we're gonna get which is why I feel Lacy will be looked back on as Joe's defining fight.

To be honest the only "big" fights out there for Joe are Hopkins and Taylor and I don't think we're going to even get as big as Kessler

nickd wrote:He knocked out a shot to bits Jones and how good is Tarver really? He is living off beating the same faded Jones. Hopkins aged 41 and having not looked good in a long time moved up 2 weights and as good as shut him out. Johnson is flattered by the Jones and Tarver wins IMO, Tarver was never that good and Jones was shot to bits. Lets be honest nice as Woods is he is a European level fighter and Johnson only bested him 1 out of 2.

Don't forget that Tarver fought his way to contention to beat Jones twice, whilst being far from an all time great, Tarver was an elite level fighter.

Hopkins is an all time great, and fought the correct fight to beat Tarver, and may even have benefitted from the move up to 175, contrary to most expectations.

For my money, Johnson won both of those fights, but they were close. Woods has gone on to look dominant in his defences thus far, and whilst the division has no dominant figure, that doesn't mean there are no genuine world class fighters there.

Terence wrote:Joe is what 40 fights in and he has only fought one really meaningful fight (Brewer and Mitchell?! No). If people think that is a good solid career, well fair enough.

Which fight?

Boxing Addict wrote:Mundine, he should definately fight Mundine to sort his critics.

He won't fight Mundine. Far too dangerous.

Calzaghe vs. Lacy II anyone?

If Lacy could be sold as the biggest baddest best the first time around, surely it should work a second time?

Dangerous my arse.

Calzaghe vs. Lacy II anyone?

Oh come on!

Max Molyneux wrote:Dangerous my arse.

Calzaghe vs. Lacy II anyone?

Oh come on!

I thought in particular you would love to see this.

Joe in another super-super-superfight that he CANNOT lose. Isn't this the stuff you love?

He would never face Lacy again.

Seriously, who in Super Middle could beat him?

Max Molyneux wrote:He would never face Lacy again.

Seriously, who in Super Middle could beat him?

Could - a handful.
Would - maybe Kessler.

Will - noone, because Calzaghe ducks them all.

Kessler is badly overated.

I don't think any current Super Middle would.

If Beyer's cashing in against Kessler then he's lucky he;s not cashed in against Joe. He'd be left in pieces!

Max Molyneux wrote:Kessler is badly overated.

I don't think any current Super Middle would.

I know you don't.

If Beyer's cashing in against Kessler then he's lucky he;s not cashed in against Joe. He'd be left in pieces!

He would have liked to, but what can he do - Joe "the duckling" Calzaghe ducky duck ducked him....

Cheers, P

PS: Max, why don't you just admit: Calzaghe is nothing special. You'll feel better after it.

Cheers, P

pundit wrote:

bigynzing wrote: JC would rip Kessler to shreds...

He would have to fight him first.

Thats why i wrote would...and not has.

Please tell me this....why ridicule joe`s record then big up Kessler who has fought no-one apart from Mundine(Ottke KO victim)...Kessler has fought only 3 fights less than JC and lets face it..apart from 1 name the guys on his record are down right laughable

pundit wrote:

Boxing Addict wrote:Mundine, he should definately fight Mundine to sort his critics.

He won't fight Mundine. Far too dangerous.

Pundit whats your problem with us Brits, i know it goes further than just Hatton and Calzaghe. Did your Mum get raped by a brit or is your dad Irish cos you got one hell of a chip on your shoulder!

bigynzing is right though he never seems to answer the questions about Kesslers record...

mattym wrote:bigynzing is right though he never seems to answer the questions about Kesslers record...

What's the problem with Kessler's record? He has been a beltholder for less than 2 years, for this his record is pretty good. It will be even better after unifying the two major belts against Markus Beyer - the fighter Calzaghe just duckduckducked.

PS: I like Hatton and I like Brits, hence I dunno really what you're talking about. BBC, Newcastle Brown Ale, Kew Gardens - all world class.

Oh so 3 fighters only make Kessler's record eh?

Ones shot (Lucas)and the other's limited(Siaca).

Calzaghe wouldn't duck anyone who Ko'ed Beyer(Catley), Catley who got beat by Woodhall who Joe beat.

Plus Mundines fighting the winner after Andrande so why should Joe wait for the winner? He'd get criticised like mad fighting stay busy opponents waiting.

You were calling Ottke a ducker of Calzaghe, then he retired so you jumped on Joe.

Max Molyneux wrote: Calzaghe ducks everyone with a life body, he just ducked Beyer

Finally you got it

Max Molyneux wrote: Apart from being a compulsive ducker, Calzaghe is nothing special. His record as a beltholder is outright shameful

Very true. I couldn't have said it better.

Hey please be careful pundit. You quoted me, but then went on to reply to an issue with someone else, making it look like i had accused you of disliking Brits!

I dont know why you spend so much time on Calzaghe though when there are other fighters who have genuinely ducked people.

He didnt need to duck Beyer, Beyer found two losses all on his own without Calzaghe. One thing wich is a bit of a flaw in your argument, you always slagged the Lacy fight, because Joe's camp said from the beginning they knew how to beat Lacy, and to you that makes the win worth less for Calzaghe. Well MAYBE, he has always known exactly how to beat Kessler, MAYBE he has read your posts and thought, "yep, ill go for a challenge as we know how to beat Kessler, no point handpicking, il move up to light-heavyweight."

Well your argument has now come back to bite you in the arse it seems, because i always thought it was TO CALZAGHE'S CREDIT if he has figured out how to beat Lacy, but you insisted that meant he was dodging a real challenge (what sort of fighter goes into a fight NOT knowing how to win - a losing one!) well now the shoe is on the other foot, because Calzaghe has said he knows how to beat Kessler, so in your esteemed book of rules he should not fight him.

As for Kessler's record, at about 10-0 a fighter should altogether give up facing guys with more than 10 losses, or half as many losses as wins, but Kessler kept doing that until EXTREMELY recently, and should have gone on to better competition if he is to earn a shot at the champ (and such an adamant fan).

Il do a little count on the number of fighters he has faced after 10-0 with more than 10 losses, or half as many losses as wins, and post it shortly. Il also do the same for Calzaghe up to 38-0 (this is assuming Kessler beats Beyer).

There will then be a second count, on how many fighters each had faced from 10-0 up to 38-0, who had atleast 9 wins to each of their losses.

hey PUNDIT, the first study showed that Kessler, after reaching 10-0 has faced 7 guys with more than 10 losses OR half as many losses as wins, whereas Calzaghes was only 7.

This next one i really like. In opponents with nine wins to each of their losses, Calzaghe from 10-0 to 38-0 had faced 18, whereas Kessler has faced six. Joes competition is three times better than Kessler's. Its goodnight from me, and its goodnight from Joe.