hopkins, calzaghe. slap his way to a descision?

[The Surgeon]

See, and here is the problem. You didn't even see the fights you are talking about. Brewer got robbed bigtime in the first fight against Ottke and I scored Brewer-Ottke II a draw, but with the point deduction I had Ottke winning by 1 point.

I saw the fights dude. Do i remember the exact scoring of a crap fight between two average fighters from about 10 years ago? No. But i do think i had Ottke scoring at least 1 win over him before he fought Joe and by the sounds of it so did u.....

He may have slipped a lil in the short time between their fights but he was never a great fighter. Regardless of whether or not he was a great fighter or not the point is he lost to Ottke then fought Joe who got a dodgy stoppage imo

[crold1]

I saw the fights dude. Do i remember the exact scoring of a crap fight between two average fighters from about 10 years ago? No. But i do think i had Ottke scoring at least 1 win over him before he fought Joe and by the sounds of it so did u.....

He may have slipped a lil in the short time between their fights but he was never a great fighter. Regardless of whether or not he was a great fighter or not the point is he lost to Ottke then fought Joe who got a dodgy stoppage imo

Brewer wasn't a stoppage. Mitchell was (and I thought the hook was a little early but not a terrible stop). Calzaghe-Brewer was a fun distance fight. Brewer was a funny guy. Bad chin, but if you weren't a puncher, he was a night's work.

Interesting thing about Mitchell: Calzaghe was always kind of a sucker for a decent right hand but he always took them well. After Mitchell, with his legs aging, he suffered some knockdowns from it. Mitchell didn't do a lot right, but that right hand was a mammoth. His KO of Liles was ill

[The Surgeon]

Brewer wasn't a stoppage. Mitchell was (and I thought the hook was a little early but not a terrible stop). Calzaghe-Brewer was a fun distance fight. Brewer was a funny guy. Bad chin, but if you weren't a puncher, he was a night's work.

Interesting thing about Mitchell: Calzaghe was always kind of a sucker for a decent right hand but he always took them well. After Mitchell, with his legs aging, he suffered some knockdowns from it. Mitchell didn't do a lot right, but that right hand was a mammoth. His KO of Liles was ill

My mistake, was because i was talking about Byron in the original post!

Yeah the man had a punch for sure and i enjoyed him. Not exactly the ingredients of a ATG resume though is he...

Thanks for correcting me there without being a dick about it to btw

[crold1]

My mistake, was because i was talking about Byron in the original post!

Yeah the man had a punch for sure and i enjoyed him. Not exactly the ingredients of a ATG resume though is he...

Thanks for correcting me there without being a dick about it to btw

No problem...and no need to be a dick. I knew what you were getting at. I've made the case in the past for why I think Calzaghe qualifies as a great, particularly a divisional great, though I think there are some compelling arguments against. His depth of opposition is a weakness.

Here's a piece from 2008: http://www.boxingscene.com/measured-...alzaghe--16920

I think rating him in the back half of a top 100 all time would be tough and was probably overstated on my part. Maybe WAY back. I at least avoided hyperbole about greatest Brit or Welsh ever...that was funny to me even then. I do think though there are more than 100 fighters who could rate as ATG on some level. I see it in degrees. One can be great and still fall miles short of guys like Greb, Robinson etc.

[Anthony342]

Jones was shot. No good.

Kessler and Hopkins are the only decent wins he has when you want to compare him to an ATG.

That's a shame really. That win over Kessler showed he was a level above him. He could well have been an ATG if he had been ready to take the risks. But he wasn't.

The win over Eubank was okay

So the only notable unbeaten boxers would be Marciano and Mayweather? I'll throw in Calzaghe for the Kessler and Hopkins wins then too.

[The Surgeon]

No problem...and no need to be a dick. I knew what you were getting at. I've made the case in the past for why I think Calzaghe qualifies as a great, particularly a divisional great, though I think there are some compelling arguments against. His depth of opposition is a weakness.

Here's a piece from 2008: http://www.boxingscene.com/measured-...alzaghe--16920

I think rating him in the back half of a top 100 all time would be tough and was probably overstated on my part. Maybe WAY back. I at least avoided hyperbole about greatest Brit or Welsh ever...that was funny to me even then. I do think though there are more than 100 fighters who could rate as ATG on some level. I see it in degrees. One can be great and still fall miles short of guys like Greb, Robinson etc.

Cheers for the link mate, and yeah i agree one can be GREAT withoiut being close to a SRR or Armstrong ect

[Capaedia]

So the only notable unbeaten boxers would be Marciano and Mayweather? I'll throw in Calzaghe for the Kessler and Hopkins wins then too.

Swap Calzaghe for Ricardo Lopez and youre not far off.

If Calzaghe is remembered, it wont be off the strength of his career.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[Anthony342]

Yeah I know what you mean. Not remembered so much in future generations, more by those who watched him when he was active, like us when he would appear on HBO. I'll remember him anyway. From the posts I've read here about him, I thought Lopez wasn't that highly regarded by most. Seems to be some that either really like him or really don't. So how good was he really? And was he the only strawweight shown on TV on a regular basis. Other than him and Calderon, I've never heard of any others televised that often. Lightweight, Welterweight, Middle, Light Heavy and Heavyweight seem to have the longest histories and lineages for title reigns from what I've read, while others like Bantam, Feather and Super Feather are sometimes shown if there's maybe one exciting fighter that networks like, like Miguel Garcia or Gamboa.

[Capaedia]

He was very dominant in his weightclass, but he lacked the competition to back that up against. He could have moved up for tougher challenges, but he did not.

Personally, I have no problem with that. No-one has any problem with greats like Hagler or Monzon keeping to one division, although I guess the middleweight division was a lot healthier.

I think most would agree he was an ATG though. He just didn't have a sparkling HOFer studded resume.

As for shown on TV, I don't know. Outside of Tyson, boxing never got much exposure in New Zealand.