BoxRec

im soory bu barrys boxing sense has went out the window when he said that joe calzaghe is the best british boxer ever?????

by doing what??....the men he has beat lol...dont make me laugh...i could have looked good fighting 90% of the men joe has fought.

all fighters mentioned below would have beat joe and have beaten much better men......mythical fights included

lennox lewis
ricky hatton
barry mguigan
nigel benn
steve collins.....although fight would have been close
naseem hamed
lloyd honeyghan
john conteth
ken buchanan....joe would not even win a round

chris eubank....has beat better men but joes style would beat eubank


now if joe beats kessler then goes and fights the best in america and wins then maybe he might enter the top 5.

but as they say in ulster...barry your an eejit

boxerbob wrote:im soory bu barrys boxing sense has went out the window when he said that joe calzaghe is the best british boxer ever?????

by doing what??....the men he has beat lol...dont make me laugh...i could have looked good fighting 90% of the men joe has fought.

all fighters mentioned below would have beat joe and have beaten much better men......mythical fights included

lennox lewis
ricky hatton
barry mguigan
nigel benn
steve collins.....although fight would have been close
naseem hamed
lloyd honeyghan
john conteth
ken buchanan....joe would not even win a round

chris eubank....has beat better men but joes style would beat eubank


now if joe beats kessler then goes and fights the best in america and wins then maybe he might enter the top 5.

but as they say in ulster...barry your an eejit

Best British boxer ever is almost impossible to accertain - My choice for that mythical title would be Ken Buchanan I think but there are other options who should be considered also - Obviously you wouldnt agree but I do believe Joe has to be in the top five - What did surprise me was Barrys comparison of Khan with Mayweather.

Jimmy Wilde was probably the best. But after that i got no problem with Calzaghe getting the nod...Lewis is the only other real contender.

Peak Eubank might have been able to stop Calzaghe later on. He really clocked Joe at the end of their fight and remember, that was a shopworn Eubank who took the fight at short notice. With his right hand and counterpunching skills I think Chris on one of his good nights could have beaten Calzaghe – and I mean GOOD NIGHTS (Wharton/Rochiggiani/Benn 1/Watson2).

Let's be honest, the only reason Calzaghe's name can even be brought up in this argument is because British boxing has such a shitty history when it comes to producing great fighters.

Lewis is clearly number one in my opinion, certainly in the modern era he is.

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Peak Eubank might have been able to stop Calzaghe later on. He really clocked Joe at the end of their fight and remember, that was a shopworn Eubank who took the fight at short notice. With his right hand and counterpunching skills I think Chris on one of his good nights could have beaten Calzaghe – and I mean GOOD NIGHTS (Wharton/Rochiggiani/Benn 1/Watson2).

True Calzaghe was out on his feet at the end of that fight, however that wasn't a peak Calzaghe in there so you can only really compare peak with peak. Calzaghe hadn't been beyond 8 rounds before that fight.

ArtOfWar wrote:Let's be honest, the only reason Calzaghe's name can even be brought up in this argument is because British boxing has such a shitty history when it comes to producing great fighters.

Lewis is clearly number one in my opinion, certainly in the modern era he is.

I disagree. We have a very good boxing heritage especially for a smallish country.

Joe has plenty of talent for sure but he still doesn't have enough big names to go down as our best.....Hatton has a better resume at the moment....

Talent wise, maybe Joe is right up there...but so then is Naz....difference is Joe is unbeaten....if Kessler is Joe's Barrera then Little Barry's claims go out of the window if one exists in the Warren utopia he finds himself a part of....

Potentially McGuigan's claims could be proven correct....a win over Kessler will define Calzaghe as the most dominant super-middleweight champion ever....that will still leave him one or two fights short of great greatness....Hopkins/Wright or Taylor could provide that platform

I think that if Calzahe beats Kessler, he will definitely have a decent claim.

I mean, how do you judge who is best anyway? Calzaghe's definitely a major talent, and he's been a very dominant champ, albeit not always against the best comp. Wins over Lacy, Kessler (should he win of course), Mitchell, Brewer, Eubank, Reid, Woodhall and Statire, and a very long unbeaten run makes a pretty strong case.

Wilde is the guy often quoted, and he did have a magnificent record, and fought some of the top dogs of his day, but he also fought in the lighter weights which tend to have a smaller talent pool, and there's not much to go on except for contemporary accounts.

I prefer to say Calzaghe is one of the best fighters this country has produced and leave it at that.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think that if Calzahe beats Kessler, he will definitely have a decent claim.

I mean, how do you judge who is best anyway? Calzaghe's definitely a major talent, and he's been a very dominant champ, albeit not always against the best comp. Wins over Lacy, Kessler (should he win of course), Mitchell, Brewer, Eubank, Reid, Woodhall and Statire, and a very long unbeaten run makes a pretty strong case.

Wilde is the guy often quoted, and he did have a magnificent record, and fought some of the top dogs of his day, but he also fought in the lighter weights which tend to have a smaller talent pool, and there's not much to go on except for contemporary accounts.

I prefer to say Calzaghe is one of the best fighters this country has produced and leave it at that.

As you allude to, it's very hard to compare boxers from the modern era - post war, with the old-schoolers like Wilde and Ted Lewis....they fought in an entirely different context

IMO, Lennox is out there on his own from the modern era

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Peak Eubank might have been able to stop Calzaghe later on. He really clocked Joe at the end of their fight and remember, that was a shopworn Eubank who took the fight at short notice. With his right hand and counterpunching skills I think Chris on one of his good nights could have beaten Calzaghe – and I mean GOOD NIGHTS (Wharton/Rochiggiani/Benn 1/Watson2).

As said earlier though, Calzaghe was an inexperienced fighter back then. So whilst chris was shopworn, Calzaghe was nowhere near his peak either.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Peak Eubank might have been able to stop Calzaghe later on. He really clocked Joe at the end of their fight and remember, that was a shopworn Eubank who took the fight at short notice. With his right hand and counterpunching skills I think Chris on one of his good nights could have beaten Calzaghe – and I mean GOOD NIGHTS (Wharton/Rochiggiani/Benn 1/Watson2).

As said earlier though, Calzaghe was an inexperienced fighter back then. So whilst chris was shopworn, Calzaghe was nowhere near his peak either.

Yes true, although with Joe its is a bit difficult to see if he is indeed any better now than back in 1997. The mistakes he was making in 1997 - he was still making vs Reid, still making vs Brewer (great fight, but Joe made it harder than it should have been) and still making vs Bika.

Is he really a much better fighter? Eubank clearly wasn't as quick or a sharp... Not even compared to the Steve Collins fight IMO.

adamiw wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think that if Calzahe beats Kessler, he will definitely have a decent claim.

I mean, how do you judge who is best anyway? Calzaghe's definitely a major talent, and he's been a very dominant champ, albeit not always against the best comp. Wins over Lacy, Kessler (should he win of course), Mitchell, Brewer, Eubank, Reid, Woodhall and Statire, and a very long unbeaten run makes a pretty strong case.

Wilde is the guy often quoted, and he did have a magnificent record, and fought some of the top dogs of his day, but he also fought in the lighter weights which tend to have a smaller talent pool, and there's not much to go on except for contemporary accounts.

I prefer to say Calzaghe is one of the best fighters this country has produced and leave it at that.

As you allude to, it's very hard to compare boxers from the modern era - post war, with the old-schoolers like Wilde and Ted Lewis....they fought in an entirely different context

IMO, Lennox is out there on his own from the modern era

benn would of ko'd calzaghe

stujones wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

DIRT SUGAR wrote:Peak Eubank might have been able to stop Calzaghe later on. He really clocked Joe at the end of their fight and remember, that was a shopworn Eubank who took the fight at short notice. With his right hand and counterpunching skills I think Chris on one of his good nights could have beaten Calzaghe – and I mean GOOD NIGHTS (Wharton/Rochiggiani/Benn 1/Watson2).

As said earlier though, Calzaghe was an inexperienced fighter back then. So whilst chris was shopworn, Calzaghe was nowhere near his peak either.

Yes true, although with Joe its is a bit difficult to see if he is indeed any better now than back in 1997. The mistakes he was making in 1997 - he was still making vs Reid, still making vs Brewer (great fight, but Joe made it harder than it should have been) and still making vs Bika.

Is he really a much better fighter? Eubank clearly wasn't as quick or a sharp... Not even compared to the Steve Collins fight IMO.

of course he's bloody well improved since 1997. He admitted to struggling with 12 rds and was shaken late by Eubank. He threw 1100 punches on Lacy.

Showtime, after the Reid fight, said he wasn't ready for big fights, yet he did beat Brewer, Mitchell, Lacy. He has gone from WBO titlist to Ring champ and worldwide recognition. The combination punching has improved a lot.

We need to make a distinction. Joe isn't a correct fighter and never tried to be. That doesn't mean he hasn't improved as a fighter.

We could say he hasn't improved with counter punchers, perhaps, because after Reid he didn't seem to face any (apart from Veit, who boxes off the back foot but is alevel behind).

I really think we need to be responsible in our arguments on here.

1southpaw wrote:

adamiw wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think that if Calzahe beats Kessler, he will definitely have a decent claim.

I mean, how do you judge who is best anyway? Calzaghe's definitely a major talent, and he's been a very dominant champ, albeit not always against the best comp. Wins over Lacy, Kessler (should he win of course), Mitchell, Brewer, Eubank, Reid, Woodhall and Statire, and a very long unbeaten run makes a pretty strong case.

Wilde is the guy often quoted, and he did have a magnificent record, and fought some of the top dogs of his day, but he also fought in the lighter weights which tend to have a smaller talent pool, and there's not much to go on except for contemporary accounts.

I prefer to say Calzaghe is one of the best fighters this country has produced and leave it at that.

As you allude to, it's very hard to compare boxers from the modern era - post war, with the old-schoolers like Wilde and Ted Lewis....they fought in an entirely different context

IMO, Lennox is out there on his own from the modern era

benn would of ko'd calzaghe

On what basis. Calzaghe's poor chin ... think not. Does Benn outwork him ... no way. Outmuscle him ... no chance. You are viewing the past with rose tinted specs. Benn outboxed by Watson and Eubank, so why would he beat Calzaghe exactly?

Barry M is a whore. He has been spreding his little legs for whoever pays him for over 15 years now. he's got zero knowledge and less credability! He's a waste of o2

Barry makes me laugh, he must study the dictionary before every appearance and chuck in some snazzy words for extra credibility :P

Seriously though that ITV show had potential but was ruined by too many advert breaks. I got fed up and switched over to Abraham-Demers on Eurosport.

steve689 wrote:Barry makes me laugh, he must study the dictionary before every appearance and chuck in some snazzy words for extra credibility :P

Seriously though that ITV show had potential but was ruined by too many advert breaks. I got fed up and switched over to Abraham-Demers on Eurosport.

Well it's nice to hear someone trying with the language rather than falling back on the same old lines. Boxers are often stereotyped as being inarticulate and if Barry wants to swot up a bit and make an effort then all the best to him.

Going back a while but surly Bob Fitzsimmons is the greatest British Boxer of all time.

TED KID LEWIS IMO.

The Blade wrote:

1southpaw wrote:

adamiw wrote: As you allude to, it's very hard to compare boxers from the modern era - post war, with the old-schoolers like Wilde and Ted Lewis....they fought in an entirely different context

IMO, Lennox is out there on his own from the modern era

benn would of ko'd calzaghe

On what basis. Calzaghe's poor chin ... think not. Does Benn outwork him ... no way. Outmuscle him ... no chance. You are viewing the past with rose tinted specs. Benn outboxed by Watson and Eubank, so why would he beat Calzaghe exactly?

imo a early benn was an animal also he had a tyson like aura around him ok his chin wasn;t the best (but nor is calzaghe's) but he could punch and his and was very fast and imo i think calzaghe would fold

If we're judging who the best British boxer is in terms of results and who they beat then JC can't be classed as the bext British boxer ever (yet???), but if we're judging it on who was best at Boxing and for how long then I think JC has a decent claim to the number 1 spot.....judging by the boxers that I've seen (I'm not much of a historian of the sport though)

Joe has been ranked in the Ring top ten for 500+ weeks.

Only Veehrah Sarapong (or words to that effect) has been in longer.

boxingchatter wrote:Barry M is a whore. He has been spreding his little legs for whoever pays him for over 15 years now. he's got zero knowledge and less credability! He's a waste of o2

Stupid comment.