BoxRec

Its amazing the amount of people, no doubt all big fans of the sport with a good degree of knowledge, that are comming out with the statement "he's undefeated, a champion for 10 years, he's a legend, well done Joe!". It baffles me. A champion of what, the fcuking WBOgus belt that Sports Network has had in their pocket for years. Its nonsense. Undefeated, simply because he fought in the wilderness for the vast majority of his prime, only stepping up to the plate when every fan involved in the sport had washed their hands with him. He fought Lacy bacuase he was forced to by the fans and media, DONT forget that. He was ridiculed into a corner and the only way out was to fight Lacy. After that victory he then tried to emulate what Hatton was doing by fighting live bodies, winning titles, fighting in Vegas etc. Had Hatton never been, i doubt Calzaghe ever would have fought for a REAL world title or have ever fought in the states!

gobbles wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

big lennox wrote:Joe Calzaghe = a dead set legend.i think it was james Toney who said you cna't call yourslef a proper world champion until you've held onto it for two years.To hold on to his for so long is quite simply, remarkable.Even factoring in bad days, awkward opponents, guys raising their game forv their title shot, injuries, for him to not lose once is quite something.

He'd have chased Otke out of the ring.An all time great.

Oh do come along. Ottke was a very good fighter in his own right - Calzaghe struggled with awkward movers and counterpunchers, Ottke was very good at both. Joe wouldn't have been able to chase him out of the ring.

Staying unbeaten is impressive, but it's a lot easier when you're facing shit opposition, which Calzaghe did consistently.

Behave. Ottke was upright, slow and didn't throw many punches. Even someone like Starie gave Ottke problems, while Reid, who by that stage was basically a spoiler (see Lacy fight where he didn't have a clue and just held), was robbed in many people's view. Ottke was only happy when allowed to dictate, something he wouldn't have done against Calzaghe. Sauerland just didn't want to know. Interestingly, Ottke is not held in any great esteem in Germany now, unlike someone like Henry Maske who is still a superstar.

Slow? How many Ottke fights have you seen. Ottke was old and clapped out when he fought Reid, he'd been in decline for a couple of years. Reid was definetly robbed in that fight, no doubt about it, but Ottke was a shell of what he'd been about 5 years previous. Ottke was quick enough to beat Mundine - hardly known for being slothful of foot and hand.

Ottke was boring as hell, not my cup of tea at all - but he was effective, and crucially, he fought a better level of opposition than Calzaghe except for the last couple of years of Calzaghe's career.

I rate Calzaghe slightly higher, but Ottke deserves respect.



And how do you know what regard he's held in? Based on what? And anyway, that's an ancilliary argument, it has no bearing on it.

His association with Fwank made him a laughiung stock for most of his career.

But the boy had/has serious talent.

Would have like to have seen him fight Froch - but other than that.

Very good career - but he could have been one of the best ever, imo.

Wasted his best years with Fwank.

Good luck, Boyo!

Autobarn wrote:I don't think there's any question Joe is better than Ottke. Yes not fighting Ottke was a massive hole in the record.

What for instance would Ottke-Lacy e like? Sven SD12 - maybe - with a sympathetic ref and biased judges. Running for dear life, barely scraping by, peck and run for miles.

Ottke would have picked Lacy apart and won a wide UD, Typsko nearly beat Lacy twice, Taylor shut him out. Sven is allot better than most make him out to be but yes Joe is better

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

Autobarn wrote:I don't think there's any question Joe is better than Ottke. Yes not fighting Ottke was a massive hole in the record.

What for instance would Ottke-Lacy e like? Sven SD12 - maybe - with a sympathetic ref and biased judges. Running for dear life, barely scraping by, peck and run for miles.

Ottke would have picked Lacy apart and won a wide UD, Typsko nearly beat Lacy twice, Taylor shut him out. Sven is allot better than most make him out to be but yes Joe is better

Ottke was good admittedly but he was an amateur who did it all on his own terms. The times he was beaten, there was a way out i.e. cut by mystery head butt, rescued by ref, sympathetic scorign by judges. If he's had to campaign elsewhere - if there was money in other countries for the title figths - chances are Svenny would have been battered and stopped and outpointed a few times.

The Lacy who was on the way up, from the IBF title winning effort and the successful defences vs Rubin Williams, Reid and Pemberton was a good fighter improving. If Ottke - even a 100% Ottke - fought that Lacy let's face it he'd be running for dear life and winning narrowly.

I suppose his mobility would have troubled Calzaghe, in a pesky little sort of way.

Still, we shouldn't be talking about this, Joe Legend should have removed all doubt surely, when they were both active.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Behave. Ottke was upright, slow and didn't throw many punches. Even someone like Starie gave Ottke problems, while Reid, who by that stage was basically a spoiler (see Lacy fight where he didn't have a clue and just held), was robbed in many people's view. Ottke was only happy when allowed to dictate, something he wouldn't have done against Calzaghe. Sauerland just didn't want to know. Interestingly, Ottke is not held in any great esteem in Germany now, unlike someone like Henry Maske who is still a superstar.[/quote]

Slow? How many Ottke fights have you seen. Ottke was old and clapped out when he fought Reid, he'd been in decline for a couple of years. Reid was definetly robbed in that fight, no doubt about it, but Ottke was a shell of what he'd been about 5 years previous. Ottke was quick enough to beat Mundine - hardly known for being slothful of foot and hand.

Ottke was boring as hell, not my cup of tea at all - but he was effective, and crucially, he fought a better level of opposition than Calzaghe except for the last couple of years of Calzaghe's career.

I rate Calzaghe slightly higher, but Ottke deserves respect.



And how do you know what regard he's held in? Based on what? And anyway, that's an ancilliary argument, it has no bearing on it.[/quote]

well, I saw Ottke live twice and about half his fights on TV or online. The thing you really noticed about him up close was just how inactive he was. He would try and steal every round. Better opposition? Well he fought Johnson (Johnson bitterly disputed the decision) but he went the distance with Tocker Pudwill and twice taken to a hometown split decision by Brewer. Overall he faced slightly better opposition at the time when both were champions together, but that's the money German TV put in. Of the common opponents, Calzaghe beat them all much more convincingly.
Ottke was no mug, but he was no Calzaghe.

Fu-ck Ottke.

He would SD a Southern Area champion!

JC is a true Champion in my opinon but he could have been a bit more.

I'm wondering who this great fighter is that achieved some of the things Calzaghe is being accused of not doing, such as

Beating every other great fighter in the sport at their prime
Just clikcing their fingers and the big fights they want magically appear
A constant underdog who amazes in every performance and wins
An Ali like personality
Fought for 20 years and took on and beat all comers irrespective of age, entitlement, money
The world stopped still when they fought, it was liek the grand national/FA Cup final/miss world/blue peter special event all rolled into one.

Wouldn't mind seeing this guy, is he on youtube?

If Johnson still bitterly disputes losing to Ottke, someone should send Glen a copy of the fight.

Glen was not in shape, it's obvious to anyone who watched. He dud OK early, then tired, and did nothing but swing and miss.

If Glen Johnson won that fight, I am Clem Snide's living arsehole.

Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight, but the truth is he was not busy enough for Calzaghe and did'nt have the fire power to keep him off. He was durable though, and would have seen the final bell, so Calzaghe by WIDE ud for me.

People say Calzaghe boxed some bad opposition along the way, but who hasn't + he just kept on winning.Law of average usually throws up a defeat in all sports -Lennox Lewis is a great and he got iced by less than stella opposition TWICE, when not motivated/over confident.

The argument that Calzaghe only boxed good people when he had too is not relevant. When he did box the best, he won, and quite comfortably too (as it happens, I think he would have boxed any of the top guys earlier, given the chance).

big lennox wrote:Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight

I thought that was the refs doing that in germany.

Fact for me is when Reid fought Ottke, he DID beat quite handily IMO. But the fight being in Germany meant one thing, and that one thing will always make me laugh at ANY german world champion. They are simply not world class unless fighting and tested outside Germany.

big lennox wrote:Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight, but the truth is he was not busy enough for Calzaghe and did'nt have the fire power to keep him off. He was durable though, and would have seen the final bell, so Calzaghe by WIDE ud for me.

People say Calzaghe boxed some bad opposition along the way, but who hasn't + he just kept on winning.Law of average usually throws up a defeat in all sports -Lennox Lewis is a great and he got iced by less than stella opposition TWICE, when not motivated/over confident.

The argument that Calzaghe only boxed good people when he had too is not relevant. When he did box the best, he won, and quite comfortably too (as it happens, I think he would have boxed any of the top guys earlier, given the chance).

Oliver McCall and Rahman were a damned sight better than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume, they were both top 10 fighters for many many years in the division.

So what if Lennox lost, he got cocky and lazy, and battered both of them in rematches - your point is?

Ted wrote:

big lennox wrote:Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight

I thought that was the refs doing that in germany.

Fact for me is when Reid fought Ottke, he DID beat quite handily IMO. But the fight being in Germany meant one thing, and that one thing will always make me laugh at ANY german world champion. They are simply not world class unless fighting and tested outside Germany.

Ottke was 37 and well past his best when he fought Reid. That's ONE fight.

gobbles wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Behave. Ottke was upright, slow and didn't throw many punches. Even someone like Starie gave Ottke problems, while Reid, who by that stage was basically a spoiler (see Lacy fight where he didn't have a clue and just held), was robbed in many people's view. Ottke was only happy when allowed to dictate, something he wouldn't have done against Calzaghe. Sauerland just didn't want to know. Interestingly, Ottke is not held in any great esteem in Germany now, unlike someone like Henry Maske who is still a superstar.

Slow? How many Ottke fights have you seen. Ottke was old and clapped out when he fought Reid, he'd been in decline for a couple of years. Reid was definetly robbed in that fight, no doubt about it, but Ottke was a shell of what he'd been about 5 years previous. Ottke was quick enough to beat Mundine - hardly known for being slothful of foot and hand.

Ottke was boring as hell, not my cup of tea at all - but he was effective, and crucially, he fought a better level of opposition than Calzaghe except for the last couple of years of Calzaghe's career.

I rate Calzaghe slightly higher, but Ottke deserves respect.



And how do you know what regard he's held in? Based on what? And anyway, that's an ancilliary argument, it has no bearing on it.[/quote]

well, I saw Ottke live twice and about half his fights on TV or online. The thing you really noticed about him up close was just how inactive he was. He would try and steal every round. Better opposition? Well he fought Johnson (Johnson bitterly disputed the decision) but he went the distance with Tocker Pudwill and twice taken to a hometown split decision by Brewer. Overall he faced slightly better opposition at the time when both were champions together, but that's the money German TV put in. Of the common opponents, Calzaghe beat them all much more convincingly.
Ottke was no mug, but he was no Calzaghe.[/quote]

Ottke fought Brewer and Mitchell before Calzaghe - Ottke's style always meant he was going to be in closer fights, he wasn't a big puncher, Calzaghe fought people usually aafter Ottke had already beaten them.

I've seen most of Ottke's fights, I've got them all on tape - lots of those fights were close, but they weren't contraversial. Stealing rounds was what Ottke did - it's what Mayweather does too, so what?

Johnson disputes every fight he loses. So what?

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

big lennox wrote:Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight, but the truth is he was not busy enough for Calzaghe and did'nt have the fire power to keep him off. He was durable though, and would have seen the final bell, so Calzaghe by WIDE ud for me.

People say Calzaghe boxed some bad opposition along the way, but who hasn't + he just kept on winning.Law of average usually throws up a defeat in all sports -Lennox Lewis is a great and he got iced by less than stella opposition TWICE, when not motivated/over confident.

The argument that Calzaghe only boxed good people when he had too is not relevant. When he did box the best, he won, and quite comfortably too (as it happens, I think he would have boxed any of the top guys earlier, given the chance).

Oliver McCall and Rahman were a damned sight better than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume, they were both top 10 fighters for many many years in the division.

So what if Lennox lost, he got cocky and lazy, and battered both of them in rematches - your point is?

Rahman was a joke, as shown in fights against Klitschko, Maskaev and Ruiz. And the big him and " than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume" was that Calzaghe beat the ones he faced, Lewis got knocked out.

gobbles wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

big lennox wrote:Sven was very effective at making people fight his fight, but the truth is he was not busy enough for Calzaghe and did'nt have the fire power to keep him off. He was durable though, and would have seen the final bell, so Calzaghe by WIDE ud for me.

People say Calzaghe boxed some bad opposition along the way, but who hasn't + he just kept on winning.Law of average usually throws up a defeat in all sports -Lennox Lewis is a great and he got iced by less than stella opposition TWICE, when not motivated/over confident.

The argument that Calzaghe only boxed good people when he had too is not relevant. When he did box the best, he won, and quite comfortably too (as it happens, I think he would have boxed any of the top guys earlier, given the chance).

Oliver McCall and Rahman were a damned sight better than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume, they were both top 10 fighters for many many years in the division.

So what if Lennox lost, he got cocky and lazy, and battered both of them in rematches - your point is?

Rahman was a joke, as shown in fights against Klitschko, Maskaev and Ruiz. And the big him and " than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume" was that Calzaghe beat the ones he faced, Lewis got knocked out.

Rahman in latter years became a joke, he got old and out of shape, but he's a damn sight better than Mger Mkrtchian.

Lewis beat a far more impressive array of fighters than Calzaghe, and aside from Ruiz and Byrd, faced everyone.

Calzaghe deserves credit for Kessler and to a lesser extent Lacy, but it's too little too late for me. Good career, impressive statistics, but short of a truly stellar career.

Lewis took more risks than Calzaghe, and got found out twice, Calzaghe would have lost some had he taken more risks.

I love the way people try to discredit Lennox Lewis based on the defeats to Rahman and McCall

When a 240lb man hits you then it is going to effing hurt if not knock you out.

Also Lewis avenged those defeats easily which is what great fighters do.

Autobarn wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

Autobarn wrote:I don't think there's any question Joe is better than Ottke. Yes not fighting Ottke was a massive hole in the record.

What for instance would Ottke-Lacy e like? Sven SD12 - maybe - with a sympathetic ref and biased judges. Running for dear life, barely scraping by, peck and run for miles.

Ottke would have picked Lacy apart and won a wide UD, Typsko nearly beat Lacy twice, Taylor shut him out. Sven is allot better than most make him out to be but yes Joe is better

Ottke was good admittedly but he was an amateur who did it all on his own terms. The times he was beaten, there was a way out i.e. cut by mystery head butt, rescued by ref, sympathetic scorign by judges. If he's had to campaign elsewhere - if there was money in other countries for the title figths - chances are Svenny would have been battered and stopped and outpointed a few times.

The Lacy who was on the way up, from the IBF title winning effort and the successful defences vs Rubin Williams, Reid and Pemberton was a good fighter improving. If Ottke - even a 100% Ottke - fought that Lacy let's face it he'd be running for dear life and winning narrowly.

I suppose his mobility would have troubled Calzaghe, in a pesky little sort of way.

Still, we shouldn't be talking about this, Joe Legend should have removed all doubt surely, when they were both active.

Again if Taylor and Typysko can school/nearly school Lacy, Sven should be able to

As for 'gift decisions' 'referee sympathy', the same could be said for Calzaghe with his Reid/Hopkins decisions and his premature stoppages, ie Mitchell

ALI wrote:Its amazing the amount of people, no doubt all big fans of the sport with a good degree of knowledge, that are comming out with the statement "he's undefeated, a champion for 10 years, he's a legend, well done Joe!". It baffles me. A champion of what, the fcuking WBOgus belt that Sports Network has had in their pocket for years. Its nonsense. Undefeated, simply because he fought in the wilderness for the vast majority of his prime, only stepping up to the plate when every fan involved in the sport had washed their hands with him. He fought Lacy bacuase he was forced to by the fans and media, DONT forget that. He was ridiculed into a corner and the only way out was to fight Lacy. After that victory he then tried to emulate what Hatton was doing by fighting live bodies, winning titles, fighting in Vegas etc. Had Hatton never been, i doubt Calzaghe ever would have fought for a REAL world title or have ever fought in the states!

Bang on the money.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Oliver McCall and Rahman were a damned sight better than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume, they were both top 10 fighters for many many years in the division.

So what if Lennox lost, he got cocky and lazy, and battered both of them in rematches - your point is?

Rahman was a joke, as shown in fights against Klitschko, Maskaev and Ruiz. And the big him and " than the scrubs in Calzaghe's resume" was that Calzaghe beat the ones he faced, Lewis got knocked out.[/quote]

Rahman in latter years became a joke, he got old and out of shape, but he's a damn sight better than Mger Mkrtchian.

Lewis beat a far more impressive array of fighters than Calzaghe, and aside from Ruiz and Byrd, faced everyone.

Calzaghe deserves credit for Kessler and to a lesser extent Lacy, but it's too little too late for me. Good career, impressive statistics, but short of a truly stellar career.

Lewis took more risks than Calzaghe, and got found out twice, Calzaghe would have lost some had he taken more risks.[/quote]


Mkrtchian was no mug, he went and knocked out Jackson Chanet in France for the European title after Calzaghe had played with him. And he wasn't hand-picked either as he was mandatory. Rahman, however, proved to be a total joke despite the amount of chances he was given. Obviously add Bowe to the list of fighters Lewis never faced, while he side-stepped Tyson until he could barely stand up and the Holyfield fight wasn't made until he was on the slide. Also declined a rematch with Klitschko, when he was losing when that fight was stopped on cuts.

What I find uncomfortable about this is the strange belief that if he had been WBC champion, he would have somehow been better. During his reign the WBC title was held by Reid, Malinga, Woodhall, Beyer, Lucas, Hilton, Catley, Thobela, Green, Sanavia and Kessler - hardly an impressive list. He beat Reid, Woodhall, Kessler and Catley as an amateur, but really, Thobela, Hilton, Sanavia, Catley?? If they had been WBO defences, some people would be putting those up next to McIntyre and Jiminez.

banjo wrote:I love the way people try to discredit Lennox Lewis based on the defeats to Rahman and McCall

When a 240lb man hits you then it is going to effing hurt if not knock you out.

Also Lewis avenged those defeats easily which is what great fighters do.

Exactly, and Rahman is not a shit fighter, or at least wasn't in his prime, he was also a very big puncher. McCall was still being competitive up until two years ago in the heavyweight division, and again, was a massive puncher.

OMG!!!

Bowe relinquished the title rather than face Lewis and you'll find it was Tyson who offered money to Lewis so HE didn't have to face Lewis, which is why he got stripped of the title when he took on the scrub that was Bruce Seldon.

Am not trying to discredit Lennox -who I think is also very underated.Hell of a champion.The point being is it is practically impossible to by undefeated regadless of the opposition. I really don't class mcCall or Rahman as being anything special in the big schemes of things. Rahman, was very, very limited.I'm just trying to say that that to retire undefeated when you factor in reid, woodall, mitchell, kessler, eubank, jones jnr, hopkins, lacy, brewer, etc you have to appreciate how good calzaghe is.

Sven Ottke made no attempt to fight clazaghe and only called Duritx Michalewski now he's retired, shot and broke -he did nt seem to want to fight either of them when they were all champions. Very telling. I though Otke lost at least 3 or 4 fights, so I don't regard him as being undefeated at all.On a separate noe, people always say De La Hoya lostv the big ones, but I think he beat Trinidad and mosley in the rematch. no doubt in my mind at all.

Lennox's competition is light years ahead of Calzaghes. Lennox fought top3 fighters year on year for about 11years, cleaning out the whole HW division. Calzaghe went for a period of 5 years where he only faced two top10 opponents, both of which were coming off loses. Lennox fought loads of top fighters in their prime, Joe fought 2. LOennox fought in 1 of the best HW eras ever in the toughest division, Joe fought in one of the weakest P4P divisions and didnt face the other top contenders for the most part

I don't dispute Lennox's achievements.A genuine all time great, and as you say, he cleaned it out.And in some style.

But, i do think people are being quick to dismiss Calaghe's career. As it happebns, i think he beat a very, very good Hopkins -who had more energy at light Heavy than he had in his last few bouts at Middleweight.Also, he dusted off Tarver, Wright and Pavlick with ease, but in the middle of this held on for survival against Calzaghe. The test for me is would a fighter be competitive against the best of other era's, and I just can't see how Calaghe would'nt be.He's certainly a step up from Collins, Benn and Eubank. How many fighters currnetly can you think of that can a) take a shot as well as him and b) throw as many punches for 12 rounds. That made him extremely hard to beat.