It's crazy to think that in Calzaghe's...

he dropped an older but still iron chinned eubank like a sack of sh|t so he must of had some form of power

It makes it all the more strange that he turned down $3m to fight him if he didn't think it was a tough fight. When he was 43, the Calzaghe fight was his biggest fight. He didn't have Oscar to fall back on. We'll have to agree to disagree. Again, I've read a number of links where he turned down the three fight contract, because of an issue with King's split. I've also read links where Bernard had said that he wasn't interested in Joe's WBO belt, and if he'd have moved up to 168 and beaten him, he wouldn't even have defended it.

The amount of BS stoppages that slappy had was rather remarkable

the amount of defending that dirk diggler will have to do in this thread will be ridiculous.............. :lol1::lol1::lol1:

Lets put it this way if Khan had a Joe Calzaghe "styled" career he too wouldve been an ATG. He was just matched TOO well.

nobody gives a crap about Calzaghe he did well at the end, but was lackluster most of his career he had talent but didn't make the most of it scrutinizing his KO percentage is pointless

It makes it all the more strange that he turned down $3m to fight him if he didn't think it was a tough fight. When he was 43, the Calzaghe fight was his biggest fight. He didn't have Oscar to fall back on. Perhaps it had nothing to do with Calzaghe. Perhaps it had everything to do with what Hopkins said it had to do with.

... first 25 fights, 23 of them ended in a knockout. A 92% KO ratio lol. Anyone else ever notice this? I'd also like to add that only 2 of those 23 were actual KO's. Now I've only really watched Calzaghe's second half of his career in spurts, but he was regarded as pretty feather-fisted at that point.. which to me, is the crazy part. Was his decline in power due injuries/surgeries? If so, I think it's still rather impressive to go from being a guy who can end a fight like that, then turn around and revamp his style to become a boxer who just completely out-fights, out-throws, and out-boxes his opponents (Regardless of a lack of top tier competition we in the SMW division like we have today). He didn't decline in power. He just faced better opponents.

But how would he have known that Joe would have been a tough fight in 2002? He'd hardly done anything then. His biggest wins were against a faded Eubank and Robin Reid. He was relatively unknown then outside of Europe. In 2008, Why would a 43 year old want to be messing with a super fit southpaw, who'd crushed Lacy? Surely there were easier fights, to make decent money. I respect your opinion, but I don't think Bernard ducked him in 2002. It makes it all the more strange that he turned down $3m to fight him if he didn't think it was a tough fight. When he was 43, the Calzaghe fight was his biggest fight. He didn't have Oscar to fall back on.

Why fight tough fights when you can fight bums and get to Oscar? That was Hopkins thinking. He also ducked James Toney at this time and the rematch with Roy Jones. But how would he have known that Joe would have been a tough fight in 2002? He'd hardly done anything then. His biggest wins were against a faded Eubank and Robin Reid. He was relatively unknown then outside of Europe. In 2008, Why would a 43 year old want to be messing with a super fit southpaw, who'd crushed Lacy? Surely there were easier fights, to make decent money. I respect your opinion, but I don't think Bernard ducked him in 2002.

He fought Pavlik, Dawson and Pascal after Joe. If you duck a guy, it's out of fear of losing. Again, what sense would it have made to duck Joe after he'd beaten the likes of Eubank and struggled with Reid, to then fight him at 43, after he'd destroyed Lacy and beaten Kessler? Hop had aged and Joe had got better. There was obviously a lot more to it, than Hop simply ducking him. Why fight tough fights when you can fight bums and get to Oscar? That was Hopkins thinking. He also ducked James Toney at this time and the rematch with Roy Jones.

It makes perfect sense. When he was 43, he had nowhere else really to go to make money. When he was 37, he could fight some bums and wait for Oscar to come up instead of facing Calzaghe. He fought Pavlik, Dawson and Pascal after Joe. If you duck a guy, it's out of fear of losing. Again, what sense would it have made to duck Joe after he'd beaten the likes of Eubank and struggled with Reid, to then fight him at 43, after he'd destroyed Lacy and beaten Kessler? Hop had aged and Joe had got better. There was obviously a lot more to it, than Hop simply ducking him.

Poorly researched, opinionated rubbish. Like most, he's accused of fighting a past prime Hopkins, however it's not mentioned that he himself was well past prime. You might want to know that Hopkins is still doing pretty well today, actually. Joe was on a end of career, Vegas payday that had eluded him throughout his career that far. He wanted to fight the legends, before he called it quits, which is why he moved up a division to make it happen. He wasnt running from old-ass Johnson or Tarver, but hey, whatever makes it easier for you to shoot your load in that sport sock I guess. The Vegas paydays had eluded him, because he wouldn't leave his British, WBO, 168 comfort zone. He didn't want anything to do with Tarver, because he didn't rate him. He said "Tarver's done nothing apart from beat a past it Roy Jones." Which puts his own win over Roy into perspective.

I don't think it was as straightforward as that. Joe was part of a three fight deal. I think Bernard turned down the three fight contract with King, not specifically the fight with Joe. Bernard was at 160 and went on to fight Oscar. Joe was at 168, and hadn't done anything on the world stage. But six years later, when Hop was 43, and Joe had beaten Lacy and was well known, they fought. So it wouldn't have made sense to duck Joe at 37 when he was unproven, to then fight him at 43 when he was more accomplished. It makes perfect sense. When he was 43, he had nowhere else really to go to make money. When he was 37, he could fight some bums and wait for Oscar to come up instead of facing Calzaghe.

How hard Joe hit is of no concern to me. I couldn't give a shit. The fact that an Old Joe went to America and Feigned Bumming Hopkins is enough for me. Especially after Hopkins ducked the **** out of a Prime fight between the two. "Here you go, Bernard, a Career high pay day." "I don't want it! I'd rather face Hakkar for 300K." "WTF!" I don't think it was as straightforward as that. Joe was part of a three fight deal. I think Bernard turned down the three fight contract with King, not specifically the fight with Joe. Bernard was at 160 and went on to fight Oscar. Joe was at 168, and hadn't done anything on the world stage. But six years later, when Hop was 43, and Joe had beaten Lacy and was well known, they fought. So it wouldn't have made sense to duck Joe at 37 when he was unproven, to then fight him at 43 when he was more accomplished.

What I have noticed is that this is a useless statistic. Like all other fighters with great KO percentages (including GGG and Deontay Wilder), his record is padded with tomato cans. Acelino Freitas won 29 of his first 30 fights by knockout. What happened after that? He started fighting live opponents. He fought 11 more times after that and lost two of those fights and had two draws. In both of the fights he lost, he quit in the middle of the round because he was getting the sh.t beat out of him. Calzaghe spent most of his career in a weak division. When he finally moved up, he fought two guys at 175 who were way past their prime -- Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins. He avoided Glenn Johnson like the plague when he had a chance to fight Johnson after Johnson KO'd Roy Jones and chose to retire instead of fighting Chad Dawson and Antonio Tarver when they were both in their primes at 175. He deserves none of the accolades that he has received. Poorly researched, opinionated rubbish. Like most, he's accused of fighting a past prime Hopkins, however it's not mentioned that he himself was well past prime. You might want to know that Hopkins is still doing pretty well today, actually. Joe was on a end of career, Vegas payday that had eluded him throughout his career that far. He wanted to fight the legends, before he called it quits, which is why he moved up a division to make it happen. He wasnt running from old-ass Johnson or Tarver, but hey, whatever makes it easier for you to shoot your load in that sport sock I guess.

If Malignaggi was British, his KO% would be much higher. true story

Calzaghe put Eubank on his backside with a single very hard shot He also beat froch on one of them daft punchball machine things that measure how hard you hit them, just funny if nothing else

What I have noticed is that this is a useless statistic. Like all other fighters with great KO percentages (including GGG and Deontay Wilder), his record is padded with tomato cans. Acelino Freitas won 29 of his first 30 fights by knockout. What happened after that? He started fighting live opponents. He fought 11 more times after that and lost two of those fights and had two draws. In both of the fights he lost, he quit in the middle of the round because he was getting the sh.t beat out of him. Calzaghe spent most of his career in a weak division. When he finally moved up, he fought two guys at 175 who were way past their prime -- Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins. He avoided Glenn Johnson like the plague when he had a chance to fight Johnson after Johnson KO'd Roy Jones and chose to retire instead of fighting Chad Dawson and Antonio Tarver when they were both in their primes at 175. He deserves none of the accolades that he has received. Antonio Tarver was in his prime at 40 years old?

he also used to be a devastating body puncher as seen in this video