Happy Birthday to one of the greatest of all time, Joe Calzaghe. 45 years old today!

Beat everyone they put in front of him Embarrassed Hopkins and made Roy looked foolish Awesome fighter How the hell did he embarrass Hopkins? He made Roy look foolish? What, at almost 40 years old, 4 years after Glen Johnson had beaten him up and knocked him out? It was Joe who looked foolish. Signing to a fight a guy who he'd labelled as shot since 2004, and citing in 2007, that any future fight would now be pointless. I'm going to hope that you're just trolling for a joke.

Beat everyone they put in front of him Embarrassed Hopkins and made Roy looked foolish Awesome fighter

The Byron Mitchell fight is one of my favourite fights.

You must not have followed boxing for long. Waiting on fighters to get old and fighting almost exclusively at home. The guy even told his son that Roy Jones wasn't the same fighter ffs. Sounds like andre ward

One of the greatest cherry pickers and duckers of all time. Couldn't agree more.

well said ^..... Well said? Why? Tarver, Johnson, and an inactive, 172 pound Tito, made Roy look average at almost 40. Joe was fortunate to beat a 43 old Hopkins. It was quantity vs quality, and Joe and Enzo were convinced he'd lost. He didn't make Bernard look average.

roy and joe were both elite fighters, in the top echelon, but joe would have beat him. they were both old when they fought and joe boxed rings around him, wasnt even close. it would have been closer in roys prime but joe would have been too clever for him. No he wouldn't have. I know you're a fan, but break it down logically. Roy was faster. He had more variation. He had more power. He had better timing. He was more accurate. He was much harder to hit. Although Joe was a great fighter, he was always relatively easy to hit, especially with right hands. He was dropped by Byron Mitchell, Kabary Salem, Bernard Hopkins and Roy. His defence never altered over the years. You seem to have a fixation with their 2008 fight. But what you don't realise, is that the versions of Roy from 1993-2003, are literally nothing like the version that Joe fought in 2008. The only thing those versions shared was his name. It's like looking at Mike Tyson from 1986, and an*lysing his head movement and Bob and weave style, with his blistering combinations, and then doing a comparison with the versions who fought Lennox Lewis and Danny Williams etc. It was the same guy, but they were literally completeley different fighters. In 2008, Roy was done at the top level. His legs weren't there. His reflexes weren't there. He was gun shy. Glen Johnson beat him up in 2004, but he'd have been lucky to have won a round against Roy at his peak. Joe boxed circles around him because he was just weeks from his 40th birthday and Joe had the confidence to unload volume on him, because he knew Roy couldn't return fire. Joe had zero respect for him. He said he was washed up and he was shot in 2004, which is why in his opinion, Johnson and Tarver were able to beat him. Now if you knew anything about either guy and their styles and attributes, you'd know that if Joe had've thrown a 100 punches against Roy whilst he was at his peak, he'd have ended up in a shootout. Now Joe would never have beaten Roy in a shootout. Because again: Roy was faster, more powerful, more accurate, and harder to hit. Take a look at the psychological side of things. Joe never pursued Roy whilst he was prime, admitting in 1999 that he wasn't chasing him because he didn't want tough fights, and in 2003, stating he'd need "The Crown Jewels" due to the element of risk involved. The truth is: Joe would never have fought Roy when he was at his peak. He had too much to lose. He was unfirtunately bullied as a child, which made him vow to never lose in the ring. Which is why he played it safe and defended a lightly regarded belt 21 times in a relatively weak division. Even if for arguments sake we imagine that he would have fought Roy in his peak, I can tell you that he'd have been ultra cautious, which would have negated his own strengths of volume and fitness. Logic should tell you that a guy who struggled with Robin Reid, and who was easily dropped by guys like Byron Mitchell and Kabary Salem, didn't have what it would have taken to have beaten Roy when he was in his 20's. I respect that he was a great fighter and you think highly of him, but I watched his entire 15 year career. The best versions of Joe, would not have beaten the best versions of Roy. Although Joe was past his best in 2008, he was still an elite fighter, which was only 1-2 years from his best wins and performances against Lacy and Kessler. The versions of Roy who fought Felix Trinidad, Prince Badi Ajamu, Anthony Hanshaw and Joe, again: bared absolutely no resemble to the versions who'd fought the likes of Griffin and Hill. They were just 2 completeley different fighters. Watch Roy's rematch win over Montell Griffin, where he knocked him out with a lead left uppercut. That's what Joe would have been facing if they'd have fought years earlier. Again: Joe's defence/reflexes never changed throughout his career. Look where Roy dropped him in their fight, but imagine he'd have been 28 instead of almost 40. He'd have taken Joe out. Seriously, when you have some spare time on your hands, you should check out Roy's prime on YouTube. It's not in any way being disrespectful to Joe, to say that Roy was on a higher level in his prime. Forget their 2008 fight. It would be like saying Tyson could never have beaten Lewis, due to the outcome of their fight in 2002. The fight with Roy was an easy nights work for Joe, because he offered no threat, which again: Joe admitted beforehand. There's just no logic in claiming that Joe would always have beaten him.

theres not a fighter in history i would bet against joe beating at 168 and im being serious. he would always find a way to win. No he wouldn't. He wasn't as great as what you think. Be realistic. I watched his entire career. He wasn't good enough to have beaten Roy when he was at his SMW peak. Roy was on another level.

Don't come in here, pretending to be Bob Dylan, chatting ****. Alright? Just don't do it. Pretending to be Bob Dylan? Ha! How am I chatting sh*t exactly?

Roy was 40 and had been knocked out twice in 2004. Don't come in here, pretending to be Bob Dylan, chatting ****. Alright? Just don't do it.

He did okay, but I wanted to see a Hopkins rematch and/ or fight with Froch.

An ATG. Only he can make bhop and roid Jones look average Roy was 40 and had been knocked out twice in 2004.

simply unbeatable. One of the most talented fighters ive ever seen. He wasn't simply unbeatable. He was a great fighter though.

daggum this thread is calling you :rofl: lets go lacy!!! :usa::usa::usa:

is this the dude named scholar who didn't do enough research to know that both fury's popped positive for PEDs, and were being protected by UKAD until their careers were over and thye'd made money? fat yank tears doe, right? steve cunningham almost killed tyson fury. he'd still be on the canvas if wasn't on the gas. steve freakin cunningham :lol1: cheating scum. hope he forfeits purses, gets a lifetime ban, and his brother get knocked out brutally while he's ringside. clownery

Happy birthday great fighter beat everyone they put in front of him.