BoxRec

Given his split decision victories over Reid and Hopkins, how would it have impact Joe's legacy, if one of the other judges had agreed with the 116-111 score for Reid and the 114-113 score for Hopkins?

Fortunately for Joe he was never robbed of victory on the scorecards, but Hopkins and Reid could both argue that they were.

If Joe's record was 44-2 instead of 46-0 and even with majority of folk believing he should have got those decisions, would this have had a major impact on his legacy? Or would he have had to have avenged those losses?

If the decision had gone for Reid maybe Calzaghe would have had less cherry picked opponents. Maybe he would have had earlier fights with Jones and Hopkins.

Jones mentioned it on the Ringside programme that after he was DQ'd against Griffin, his legacy would no longer have been based on an undefeated record, and so it inspired him to seek the heavyweight challenge and then back to Light Heavy again.

It just seems to me that Joe always played it too safely, even down to the fact that he didn't have rematches in either of his bouts that had disputed decisions.

As for Froch, he was never built up the same way so the only way he could get exposure was to fight the best guys out there. I wonder if he would have been so keen to prove himself as a warrior if he had been able to pack out stadiums against the likes of Mack from an earlier time.

Why would Calzaghe want to rematch Hopkins after the way Hopkins fought ?
2nd who would ever wanna pat to watch another man try and hold another for another 12 rounds the way Hopkins did first time ?

Retiring undefeated to me means nothing unless you have faced the best, we all know, eubank and jones junior were past there best but it was out of joes control, losing is ok if you win the rematch, if he had lost to Hopkins I'm sure he would of got a rematch, but he wouldn't give Kessler a rematch so what does that tell you ?

He didn't pursue the toughest fights in his long (WBO) run at super-middle, padded his record, finally travelled to take on a pair of big names aged 40. It's a record for young fans who judge fighters on numbers rather than number of quality opponents, and weirdos with a vested interest in fighters from their country being well regarded. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. 46-0, 44-2, whatever.

I was ringside for the Reid fight and Joe definitely lost that fight. Robin at least deserved a rematch.

keithmoonhangover wrote:I was ringside for the Reid fight and Joe definitely lost that fight. Robin at least deserved a rematch.

I was at that and thought Joe won easily. He was seven rounds up after seven rounds and while Reid came on, I think I had it 8-4 at the end.
It's one of those fights that became more controversial years after because Reid never got a rematch. I seem to remember Reid actually saying on TV after the fight that he thought he lost.

gobbles wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I was ringside for the Reid fight and Joe definitely lost that fight. Robin at least deserved a rematch.

I was at that and thought Joe won easily. He was seven rounds up after seven rounds and while Reid came on, I think I had it 8-4 at the end.
It's one of those fights that became more controversial years after because Reid never got a rematch. I seem to remember Reid actually saying on TV after the fight that he thought he lost.

You were in a very small minority at the fight off you thought Joe won.

If he would have lost to Reid. I think Calzaghe could have gone down as an all time great fighter. Instead, nobody really knows how good he could have been. He valued his unbeaten record to much and I think that hurt his legacy. Calzaghe not fighting Glen Johnson was almost criminal.

I just hope Nathan Cleverly doesn't take the same route defending the WBO title while avoiding the best.

Exoddus wrote:If he would have lost to Reid. I think Calzaghe could have gone down as an all time great fighter. Instead, nobody really knows how good he could have been. He valued his unbeaten record to much and I think that hurt his legacy. Calzaghe not fighting Glen Johnson was almost criminal.

I just hope Nathan Cleverly doesn't take the same route defending the WBO title while avoiding the best.

Worth that in mind, it really wins me up when people have a go at Haye, who's flight the#1 guy in both divisions

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Exoddus wrote:If he would have lost to Reid. I think Calzaghe could have gone down as an all time great fighter. Instead, nobody really knows how good he could have been. He valued his unbeaten record to much and I think that hurt his legacy. Calzaghe not fighting Glen Johnson was almost criminal.

I just hope Nathan Cleverly doesn't take the same route defending the WBO title while avoiding the best.

Worth that in mind, it really wins me up when people have a go at Haye, who's flight the#1 guy in both divisions

Hi Keith; I don't think many who paid the PPV would accept that Haye fought Wlad. he may have got in a boxing ring with him but he didn't box him, didn't fight him and did not earn the money he blagged with his pre fight bollocks. (sorry )

keithmoonhangover wrote:I was ringside for the Reid fight and Joe definitely lost that fight. Robin at least deserved a rematch.

Calzaghe won that. Reid landed the the bigger hurtful punches but Calzaghe out pointed him fairly clearly imo.

palooka wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Exoddus wrote:If he would have lost to Reid. I think Calzaghe could have gone down as an all time great fighter. Instead, nobody really knows how good he could have been. He valued his unbeaten record to much and I think that hurt his legacy. Calzaghe not fighting Glen Johnson was almost criminal.

I just hope Nathan Cleverly doesn't take the same route defending the WBO title while avoiding the best.

Worth that in mind, it really wins me up when people have a go at Haye, who's flight the#1 guy in both divisions

Hi Keith; I don't think many who paid the PPV would accept that Haye fought Wlad. he may have got in a boxing ring with him but he didn't box him, didn't fight him and did not earn the money he blagged with his pre fight bollocks. (sorry )

I paid it and I think you're talking bollocks

I paid it as well and was disappointed and felt let down by Haye; he did not box to his ability and looked fearful; if you enjoyed the bout and were happy with the PPV I tip my hat to you

palooka wrote:I paid it as well and was disappointed and felt let down by Haye; he did not box to his ability and looked fearful; if you enjoyed the bout and were happy with the PPV I tip my hat to you

I wasn't happy with it because I didn't think Haye fought the ideal gameplan, but if you genuinely thought David Haye was going to stand in front of the robotic Klitschko and start windmilling then you're a fool.

Haye had to fight from distance or he would either get KTFO or jabbed to death.

MarkMcBurney wrote:

palooka wrote:I paid it as well and was disappointed and felt let down by Haye; he did not box to his ability and looked fearful; if you enjoyed the bout and were happy with the PPV I tip my hat to you

I wasn't happy with it because I didn't think Haye fought the ideal gameplan, but if you genuinely thought David Haye was going to stand in front of the robotic Klitschko and start windmilling then you're a fool.

Haye had to fight from distance or he would either get KTFO or jabbed to death.

I am a fool as I imagined that Haye would at least attempt to box to a win and maybe try to do more than get through the bout; they ought to have an honesty policy in boxing; you pay for the PPV after the bout and if you're satisfied that the boxer has done their best to win you pay the whack; if they've messed about and took the piss you pay a quid.

palooka wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:

palooka wrote:I paid it as well and was disappointed and felt let down by Haye; he did not box to his ability and looked fearful; if you enjoyed the bout and were happy with the PPV I tip my hat to you

I wasn't happy with it because I didn't think Haye fought the ideal gameplan, but if you genuinely thought David Haye was going to stand in front of the robotic Klitschko and start windmilling then you're a fool.

Haye had to fight from distance or he would either get KTFO or jabbed to death.

I am a fool as I imagined that Haye would at least attempt to box to a win and maybe try to do more than get through the bout; they ought to have an honesty policy in boxing; you pay for the PPV after the bout and if you're satisfied that the boxer has done their best to win you pay the whack; if they've messed about and took the piss you pay a quid.

I like David Haye, but that fight was a let down and to be honest I wouldn't pay if I had a 2nd chance. He didn't do his best.

palooka wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:

palooka wrote:I paid it as well and was disappointed and felt let down by Haye; he did not box to his ability and looked fearful; if you enjoyed the bout and were happy with the PPV I tip my hat to you

I wasn't happy with it because I didn't think Haye fought the ideal gameplan, but if you genuinely thought David Haye was going to stand in front of the robotic Klitschko and start windmilling then you're a fool.

Haye had to fight from distance or he would either get KTFO or jabbed to death.

I am a fool as I imagined that Haye would at least attempt to box to a win and maybe try to do more than get through the bout; they ought to have an honesty policy in boxing; you pay for the PPV after the bout and if you're satisfied that the boxer has done their best to win you pay the whack; if they've messed about and took the piss you pay a quid.

If Haye was genuinely coasting through the fight to lose on points, why wouldn't he just pull out with his injury in the run up to it?

Madness.

MarkMcBurney wrote:
If Haye was genuinely coasting through the fight to lose on points, why wouldn't he just pull out with his injury in the run up to it?

Madness.

Is the answer not obviously money?

Because boxing through the fight with a poorly toe made him maybe 5 million quid? Madness isn't it?

Calzaghes career was either a masterpiece or a disappointment depending how u look at it...

A great fighter for me, but only on consistency... I think head to head he wasn't as good as a prime Benn, Eubank, Jones Jnr or Toney.

I don't think he improved at all during his whole career, he just was very consistent against mostly weak opposition. But when he did step up he was able to hold his own.

I think Lacy came into the fight over confident and unprepared for a real fight. I think Kessler was a bit green, I think Woodall, brewer, Mitchell, eubank, jones jnr were well past it. But he DID beat Hopkins and on that win alone he deserves huge credit.

Jeff Thomas wrote:Calzaghes career was either a masterpiece or a disappointment depending how u look at it...

A great fighter for me, but only on consistency... I think head to head he wasn't as good as a prime Benn, Eubank, Jones Jnr or Toney.

I don't think he improved at all during his whole career, he just was very consistent against mostly weak opposition. But when he did step up he was able to hold his own.

I think Lacy came into the fight over confident and unprepared for a real fight. I think Kessler was a bit green, I think Woodall, brewer, Mitchell, eubank, jones jnr were well past it. But he DID beat Hopkins and on that win alone he deserves huge credit.

I think he had the right style to beat Toney at SuperMiddle.

gobbles wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I was ringside for the Reid fight and Joe definitely lost that fight. Robin at least deserved a rematch.

I was at that and thought Joe won easily. He was seven rounds up after seven rounds and while Reid came on, I think I had it 8-4 at the end.
It's one of those fights that became more controversial years after because Reid never got a rematch. I seem to remember Reid actually saying on TV after the fight that he thought he lost.

Reid was always pretty naiive and dumb. In tge ring he said calzaghecwon than he cried he was robbed for years.
I had reid winning by a point but the fact there wasnt a rematch says a lot.the wins over a shot jones and hopkins mean little to me.i felt hopkins won

Yes it would have affected his legacy greatly. He either would have engaged in a rematch with Reid....and further obscurity from the US market that he needed to crack before. Or, it might have got him more desperate to fight Roy Jones earlie in Roy's career....and then we'd be talking about Joe in the same way as we do Ricky. A domestic all time great, but not quite in the true elite p4p.

Jeff Thomas wrote: A great fighter for me, but only on consistency... I think head to head he wasn't as good as a prime Benn, Eubank, Jones Jnr or Toney.

I love Nigel Benn, he's one of my favourite fighters but prime for prime I don't see how he beats Calzaghe.

DMA1987 wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:
If Haye was genuinely coasting through the fight to lose on points, why wouldn't he just pull out with his injury in the run up to it?

Madness.

Is the answer not obviously money?

You think multi-millionaire David Haye really needed the money at that point in his career?

He'd make just as much money from an Audley/Chisora, if not more, than fighting a Klitschko in Germany.