BoxRec

just reading joe calzaghes comments on david haye in the boxing news when he come out with this cracker....

"when it comes to being a great champion , you need to fight the best"

so whats joes excuse for years of sub-standard so called world class competition??

ive never been a calzaghe fan because for years to refused to fight the best and travel , carl froch puts him to shame in this department (great story in box monthy by mr mcneily)

joe was world class but refused to be tested enough so nobody knows how good he was ans going by his own words he CANT be declared a great champion.

his words not mine

rant over

bull shit!! joes a legend

boxerbob wrote:just reading joe calzaghes comments on david haye in the boxing news when he come out with this cracker....

"when it comes to being a great champion , you need to fight the best"

so whats joes excuse for years of sub-standard so called world class competition??

ive never been a calzaghe fan because for years to refused to fight the best and travel , carl froch puts him to shame in this department (great story in box monthy by mr mcneily)

joe was world class but refused to be tested enough so nobody knows how good he was ans going by his own words he CANT be declared a great champion.

his words not mine

rant over

he did but at the end, theres always someone to fight joe just didnt do a run like froch but hardley amyone has had a run like that

kessler and hopkins were joes best wins but i think hopkins beat him by 1 point because of the way joe started 114-113 , that result looks even better now because of what hopkins has went on to do.

its not enough considering he was a champ for years

boxerbob wrote:kessler and hopkins were joes best wins but i think hopkins beat him by 1 point because of the way joe started 114-113 , that result looks even better now because of what hopkins has went on to do.

its not enough considering he was a champ for years

i thought hopkins won but regardless history will say joe won and thats in the records.

i think Lacy was a great win for him and i dislike this hindsight crap about lacy being overrated all the stuff leading up tio the fight said joe was ready for the taking and lacy would do it

Sven Ottke his main rival for years never wanted the fight

ottke is in the same boat with joe and should have fought better

im just going by what he said in boxing news

Adamj1987 wrote:

boxerbob wrote:kessler and hopkins were joes best wins but i think hopkins beat him by 1 point because of the way joe started 114-113 , that result looks even better now because of what hopkins has went on to do.

its not enough considering he was a champ for years

i thought hopkins won but regardless history will say joe won and thats in the records.

i think Lacy was a great win for him and i dislike this hindsight crap about lacy being overrated all the stuff leading up tio the fight said joe was ready for the taking and lacy would do it

Sven Ottke his main rival for years never wanted the fight

Calzaghe would have pi*sed all over Ottke....I scored the Hopkins fight a draw&has someone said earlier in the tread,what Hopkins has done since only excels the Calzaghe legacy...

Tommy Gunn13 wrote:

Adamj1987 wrote:

boxerbob wrote:kessler and hopkins were joes best wins but i think hopkins beat him by 1 point because of the way joe started 114-113 , that result looks even better now because of what hopkins has went on to do.

its not enough considering he was a champ for years

i thought hopkins won but regardless history will say joe won and thats in the records.

i think Lacy was a great win for him and i dislike this hindsight crap about lacy being overrated all the stuff leading up tio the fight said joe was ready for the taking and lacy would do it

Sven Ottke his main rival for years never wanted the fight

Calzaghe would have pi*sed all over Ottke....I scored the Hopkins fight a draw&has someone said earlier in the tread,what Hopkins has done since only excels the Calzaghe legacy...

i wasnt critisizing his legacy

You on drugs bob ?????

Adamj1987 wrote:

Tommy Gunn13 wrote:

Adamj1987 wrote: i thought hopkins won but regardless history will say joe won and thats in the records.

i think Lacy was a great win for him and i dislike this hindsight crap about lacy being overrated all the stuff leading up tio the fight said joe was ready for the taking and lacy would do it

Sven Ottke his main rival for years never wanted the fight

Calzaghe would have pi*sed all over Ottke....I scored the Hopkins fight a draw&has someone said earlier in the tread,what Hopkins has done since only excels the Calzaghe legacy...

i wasnt critisizing his legacy

Sorry Adam,i quoted the wrong one...

no mate im not...the only very good fighters he beat were hopkins and kessler althogh kessler isnt anywhere near great.

he beat some good fighters but fighters who he was expected to beat. lots of his title defences were against guys that were not world class

again im just going by his comments in the box news

boxerbob wrote:just reading joe calzaghes comments on david haye in the boxing news when he come out with this cracker....

"when it comes to being a great champion , you need to fight the best"

so whats joes excuse for years of sub-standard so called world class competition??

ive never been a calzaghe fan because for years to refused to fight the best and travel , carl froch puts him to shame in this department (great story in box monthy by mr mcneily)

joe was world class but refused to be tested enough so nobody knows how good he was ans going by his own words he CANT be declared a great champion.

his words not mine

rant over

Im sure Calzaghe would have fought any of the champions at his weight...

tommygunn are the the guy with the same name on the box asylum???

your statement is wrong about calzaghe wanting to fight anybody..his first 10 years reign as wbo proved that

i just like many wished he would have fought a better quality of fighter much much earlier in his career instead on tocker pudwell , branco sobat etc etc etc

boxerbob wrote:tommygunn are the the guy with the same name on the box asylum???

your statement is wrong about calzaghe wanting to fight anybody..his first 10 years reign as wbo proved that

i just like many wished he would have fought a better quality of fighter much much earlier in his career instead on tocker pudwell , branco sobat etc etc etc

Asylum...i thought i was on that site now.....yes he boxed some who are they people,but he would have beat any champion at anytime during his reign...my opinon!!

Hopkins is regarded as a great but how many mandatory defences did he make against less well-known opposition? And like Calzaghe he's had the big fights toward the back end of his career, but for every Tarver or Pavlik on his record there's a Robert Allen, Morrade Hakkar and Carl Daniels.

Calzaghe beat the best of his time. Froch is in a deeper division now than the one Calzaghe ruled, and you can hardly criticize the Welshman for that.

boxerbob wrote:kessler and hopkins were joes best wins but i think hopkins beat him by 1 point because of the way joe started 114-113 , that result looks even better now because of what hopkins has went on to do.

its not enough considering he was a champ for years

I had joe by one against hopkins. But regardless he was supposedly the underdog in the lacy fight, kessler was a great win, Eubank at that stage in his career was also a great win. A lot of the fighters he did fight are now overlooked/downplayed, like richie woodhall, bika, mitchell, brewer - people discredit the 1st mario veit win but veit was highly touted at the time.

Lets not forget Ottke didnt want to fight joe and hopkins refused to sign to fight him after already agreeing to the fight, when they were both in their prime. I think he fought and beat everyone who was willing to get in the ring with him.

The only thing that has tarnished his legacy is that he didnt fight a prime RJJ.

boxerbob wrote:j carl froch puts him to shame in this department

rant over

I am with Bob on every single point, especially the one I have quoted. Carl has become one of the best by fighting the best when they are put infront of him.

His only defeat by Kessler which if had been somewhere else Froch would have won the fight.

Froch is more of a legend than Calazaghe FACT!

boxerbob wrote:just reading joe calzaghes comments on david haye in the boxing news when he come out with this cracker....

"when it comes to being a great champion , you need to fight the best"

so whats joes excuse for years of sub-standard so called world class competition??

ive never been a calzaghe fan because for years to refused to fight the best and travel , carl froch puts him to shame in this department (great story in box monthy by mr mcneily)

joe was world class but refused to be tested enough so nobody knows how good he was ans going by his own words he CANT be declared a great champion.

his words not mine

rant over

Completely agree with your post.

boxerbob wrote:no mate im not...the only very good fighters he beat were hopkins and kessler althogh kessler isnt anywhere near great.

he beat some good fighters but fighters who he was expected to beat. lots of his title defences were against guys that were not world class

again im just going by his comments in the box news

The one argument that winds me up when using Froch's record to put down Joe is the overlooking of the fact Kessler BEAT Froch!As you said,Bob,Kessler isnt anywhere near great.....I think Hopkins would be a heavy favourite to beat Froch if they boxed right now.