BoxRec

Just a question to forum members here... I've been engaged in a bit of a post Hopkins debate (on a non boxing forum I should add) - not in terms of the scoring of the fight, or even in terms of Joe's all time standing, but in terms of his balance, movement, timing and general fluidity.

This guy compares Joe to a ballet dancer, and says his skills are up there with the likes of George best, eusebio, garrincha, cruyff, barry john, edwards, David campese.

Then Hagler is singled out as a fighter whom Joe has better fluidity than, better timing, better movement, and its because of this (and not workrate and fitness apparently) that Joe dictates the pace.

So I ask him a question to compare Joe's fluidity on other fighters... Leonard, Ray Robinson, Ali, Tyson, Lennox, Naz, Mayweather Jnr.

And apparently Joe is more fluid than all of these with the POSSIBLE expcetion of Leonard. Then he discusses how Joe dictated the pace and was in control of all of his 45 fights... ummm Robin Reid?

I'm just wandering what do others make. Now, I have been called by Wrist et al a Joe Calzaghe hater - but surely this kind of loving is just stretching it a bit far. Or am I out of order to think this?

Note: I do think Calzaghe is more fluid than some of those fighters - Namely the more awkard Naz - so I did only bring those examples of different styles - cause I aint 100% sure what this fella means.

Hmm, i would not Call Joe "Fluid".

I mean we never see him Dance around the Ring whilst keeping up the momentum.

I always saw Joe has a guy with 2 Gears.

Attack, or Defend. Both of which he can do Superbly.

some may disagree, but i always found Joe open to the Counter Punch, we saw the especially against Hopkins, so for me, no, he is Not Fluid compared to Boxers Mentioned.

It makes sense its a Non-Boxing Forum, because Nearly every Boxer is Different, and in no way does Joe have better movement to the likes of Tyson, mayweather, Naz etc.

I wouldn't really use the word "fluid". "Adaptable" is more apt. Joe is constantly moving so I think that's why he's being called "fluid".

Edit: I missed out the word "why".

observer1 wrote:Hmm, i would not Call Joe "Fluid".

I mean we never see him Dance around the Ring whilst keeping up the momentum.

I always saw Joe has a guy with 2 Gears.

Attack, or Defend. Both of which he can do Superbly.

some may disagree, but i always found Joe open to the Counter Punch, we saw the especially against Hopkins, so for me, no, he is Not Fluid compared to Boxers Mentioned.

It makes sense its a Non-Boxing Forum, because Nearly every Boxer is Different, and in no way does Joe have better movement to the likes of Tyson, mayweather, Naz etc.

Thats pretty much my view point - I thought though I was going a bit insane when I read Joe being compared favourably in every department to Floyd Mayweather Jnr.

Hamed movements (especially later on his career) tended to be more rigid and awkard... the big corkscrew shots, when landed looked great - but most of the time they missed and he would be all over the shop. I would class many authordox (and I don't mean the stance) to be more fluid than him. His awkardness was part of his success.

I was a bit gentle in my response - cause I would have hate to have read the response if I question his punch technique. This dictating the pace made me laugh a bit also.... it was Hopkins who dictated that with his holding and nulifying on Saturday... if it was up to Joe, he would have been throwing a 100 punches a round again.

Sorry he says "most fluent fighter in the boxing history bar none".

And defines fluent as a guy who has no gears and glides like he is on water.

And then Wrist et al wonder I am "showing hatred" - its not of Joe, believe me I am a fan, but its when statements like that are claimed based on him getting a controvesial decision over an aging fighter.

As I said... well promoted!

Stu Jones, your mate doesn't know what he's talking about.

Watch early Roy Jones, Pernell Whitaker, even Stevie Johnston are Mark "Too Sharp" Johnson, Sugar Shane Mosley...THAT's fluid.

Calzaghe is just an aggressive southpaw.

Stu, What the guys talking about is Oral stability, all great Athletes have it. The Biomechanics of the Body giving the Oral cavity stability and good Posture it helps the senses react better and helps the Diaphram work better for Oxygen intake.

Calzaghe looks more akward than fluid at times. When he is forced to come forward (like against Hopkins and Kessler to a certain extent) he just windmills punches which looks awful.

He can't infight and looks ameturish, and his lack of properly delivered hooks adds to his frustrating look.

He only looks truly fluid when he is jabbing and moving in and out of range.

I can't honestly say that he is more fluid then any of the boxers mentioned on Stu's list aside from Naz.

He is fluid when he hits in combination, but Hopkins doesn't let you hit in combo. Joe was most fluid v Lacy. Lacy looked like a man pelted by a high pressure hose pipe - THAT'S fluid.

As said above, Joe is fluid when moving in and out.

He doesn't seem able to fight inside anymore, like he did vs Brewer or Sheika.

I have a different question. Is there anyone who could outgun Joe up at light heavy at the moment? Because he has zero power up there which is a concern.

He's a natural fighter with excellent physical tools and an unbreakable mental win. Shit, the guy hasn't lost for nearly 20 years. That's what makes him so hard to beat. He truly thinks he's a cut above every fighter he stares across the ring at.

He's anything but 'fluid', though. Joe's disjointed-ness is one of his main traits. He's able to change it up quite nicely and get messy when he needs to get messy (which is often). When I think of fluid fighters I think of guys that are technically solid in all departments and beautiful to watch. There's nothing particularly technical or smooth about what Joe does...and I guess that's worked for him. He's ugly on the eye and ugly on his opponents.

As Kessler says, "He's just a good match spoiler."

Surely "fluid", if we're using the dictionary definition, could only ever be applied to good defensive fighters, since a preemptive movement liable to attract reaction (that is to say, a lead punch) is by its definition unpredictable in its results which prevents the boxer from moving naturally to the next shot.

I think you're friend is thinking of "fast" as opposed to "fluid" personally!

As for most fluid fighters - in my lifetime, I don't think there has been better than RJJ, who could make himself absolutely unhittable at times, whilst I agree that Sweet Pea was pretty close, as was Winky Wright until he lost interest.

He's comparing Joe to a Ballet dancer and it when he is in the ring it is like "he is walking on water".

At times Joe can box a treat but overall he is not as fluid as some of the boxers mentioned and IMO doesnt come close to leonard. I mean if he was that fluid would he have been involved in so many "messy" fights with ordinary opponents? Of the top of my head fights with Kabery Salem, Jimenez, David Starie and Bika made for pretty unpleasant viewing. Also, there is a reason he is called a "slapper." I am not a Calzaghe hater - quite the opposite but at times he does punch with the inside of the glove or does not get his full weight behind punches - "arm punches" as Jim Watt would say. Of course although not a concussive hitter when he punches correctly he must punch solidly as 32kos would indicate. But these technical deficiencies and struggling with boxers who a Leonard-type would box rings around leaves me to believe Joe is very good but definitely not fluid or poetry in motion and can be quite awkward. The Lacy fight was an exception - he looked really fluid in that fight but it flattered to decieve somewhat.

stujones wrote:Just a question to forum members here... I've been engaged in a bit of a post Hopkins debate (on a non boxing forum I should add) - not in terms of the scoring of the fight, or even in terms of Joe's all time standing, but in terms of his balance, movement, timing and general fluidity.

This guy compares Joe to a ballet dancer, and says his skills are up there with the likes of George best, eusebio, garrincha, cruyff, barry john, edwards, David campese.

Then Hagler is singled out as a fighter whom Joe has better fluidity than, better timing, better movement, and its because of this (and not workrate and fitness apparently) that Joe dictates the pace.

So I ask him a question to compare Joe's fluidity on other fighters... Leonard, Ray Robinson, Ali, Tyson, Lennox, Naz, Mayweather Jnr.

And apparently Joe is more fluid than all of these with the POSSIBLE expcetion of Leonard. Then he discusses how Joe dictated the pace and was in control of all of his 45 fights... ummm Robin Reid?

I'm just wandering what do others make. Now, I have been called by Wrist et al a Joe Calzaghe hater - but surely this kind of loving is just stretching it a bit far. Or am I out of order to think this?

Note: I do think Calzaghe is more fluid than some of those fighters - Namely the more awkard Naz - so I did only bring those examples of different styles - cause I aint 100% sure what this fella means.

Whoever you had the argument with is a moron....

stujones wrote:He's comparing Joe to a Ballet dancer and it when he is in the ring it is like "he is walking on water".

Have you seen Calzaghe when he puts his hands down? He looks like a pub brawler.

Captain Hook wrote:

stujones wrote:Just a question to forum members here... I've been engaged in a bit of a post Hopkins debate (on a non boxing forum I should add) - not in terms of the scoring of the fight, or even in terms of Joe's all time standing, but in terms of his balance, movement, timing and general fluidity.

This guy compares Joe to a ballet dancer, and says his skills are up there with the likes of George best, eusebio, garrincha, cruyff, barry john, edwards, David campese.

Then Hagler is singled out as a fighter whom Joe has better fluidity than, better timing, better movement, and its because of this (and not workrate and fitness apparently) that Joe dictates the pace.

So I ask him a question to compare Joe's fluidity on other fighters... Leonard, Ray Robinson, Ali, Tyson, Lennox, Naz, Mayweather Jnr.

And apparently Joe is more fluid than all of these with the POSSIBLE expcetion of Leonard. Then he discusses how Joe dictated the pace and was in control of all of his 45 fights... ummm Robin Reid?

I'm just wandering what do others make. Now, I have been called by Wrist et al a Joe Calzaghe hater - but surely this kind of loving is just stretching it a bit far. Or am I out of order to think this?

Note: I do think Calzaghe is more fluid than some of those fighters - Namely the more awkard Naz - so I did only bring those examples of different styles - cause I aint 100% sure what this fella means.

Whoever you had the argument with is a moron....

Well, I aint going to respond anymore - unless more deluded comments come out. I don't want to be further accused of having a personal grudge.

I think maybe that troll from last month might be on that forum cause get this....

.... PRIME Roy Jones is SLIGHTLY better than a prime Jeff Lacy!!!!!!!!

stujones wrote:I think maybe that troll from last month might be on that forum cause get this....

.... PRIME Roy Jones is SLIGHTLY better than a prime Jeff Lacy!!!!!!!!

Hahaha

Now Joe is more charasmatic than Ricky.

Ricky is as talented as Bruno = No basic skills.

and the only reason Joe hasn't fought in the states before or made as much money as Ricky is because he is Welsh.

Gray-Fox wrote:Stu Jones, your mate doesn't know what he's talking about.

Watch early Roy Jones, Pernell Whitaker, even Stevie Johnston are Mark "Too Sharp" Johnson, Sugar Shane Mosley...THAT's fluid.

Calzaghe is just an aggressive southpaw.

I agree with Whitaker, but Roy and Mosley were too speed reliant and now there average after dropping a little.

Calzaghe Is very multi dimensional and can change tatics and game plans unlike alot of good pros so he uses his brain to win as well as his natural talent.

Most great fighters have somewhat unorthodox styles for their time and do certain things better than any other fighter in history (and often at first get criticised for it), I would put Joe in this category for sure. Is he as fluid as mayweather or Sugar Ray Leonard? No. an unorthodox boxing genies with his own unique way of competing and winning? Yes

Calzaghe's a better fighter than Mayweather.

Max Molyneux wrote:Calzaghe's a better fighter than Mayweather.

Gray-Fox wrote:Stu Jones, your mate doesn't know what he's talking about.

Watch early Roy Jones, Pernell Whitaker, even Stevie Johnston are Mark "Too Sharp" Johnson, Sugar Shane Mosley...THAT's fluid.

Calzaghe is just an aggressive southpaw.

I couldnt agree more Joe is definately aggressive but he adapts well in a fight, has good workrate and skills and is very fit. As for being fluid, which I take to mean, ducking and weaving and being well balanced I wouldnt say he was the best but it seems to vary with different opponents. His usual style was in a complete mess against Hopkins but he was never going to be able to put on a show against the awkward BHop as he did with Lacy. Comparing a boxer with a footballer or a ballet dancer is a rather strange analogy as far as I am concerned. Joe is very open to the straight right and when he gets caught he does lose his balance. Anyway even if his defence isnt perfect and his fluidity isnt the best, he still gets the wins and thats all that matters.