1 Billion: Calzaghe true great or over rated fraud?

[The Surgeon]

Ah Joe Calzaghe....... HATE the guy!

46-0 and with wins over ATG's in Beranrd Hopkins and Roy Jones Jnr on his resume on the surface it seems very impressive. And it is, only to a point tho imo. Of the two best fighters he faced one was past prime but still very good despite his advanced years in B-Hop, but then again i felt Hopkins should have won that and however u slice it it was a debatable result against a 43 year old. The other great fighter he faced was Roy jones. Except it wasnt was it? It was a shadow of his corpse and nothing more. And even HE managed to dump Joe hard on his ass in the first round (as did Hopkins)

Other top wins, Kessler? Mikkel is good but its been reported that he faced Joe with an injured right hand when they battled infront of 50000 spectators in Cardiff, he has since been battered FAR more convincingly by one Andre Ward. And he isnt past his best as some will have u belive he's just not as good as some thought. A good but not great fighter.

Lacy? BUM. End of, he was never any good and Calzaghe exposed him. Big punch good chin but f all else. Lacy was a Hype job and thats that

I'll leave it at that for now on the negative stuff (i could easily go on)
and end the post with some positives

He had a great engine, could adapt mid fight, and recovered well when hurt or dropped, a testiment to his heart and his fitness. Also credit must be given for longevity despite the lack of real quality opposition, its still pretty impressive

Calzaghe also conquered TWO divisions and looked as tho he was still capable of a few more decent wins before he bowed out.

He stuck with his roots throughout his career and never left his father or their ***** box gym in Wales, and he came out with all his senses and an undefeated record

[IronDanHamza]

He's a capable fighter, definitely capable.

But he simply did pretty much nothing. His career consists of almost nothing.

He has lots of title defences at 168, only 2 of which were against fighters ranked in the Top 5 at the time; Kessler and Lacy.

Other than that he has 2 wins against at 175 against 2 fighters that were 40+ years old.

He's not an all time great. By any stretch of the imagination.

And he will get into the HOF, although there are fighters who are much more deserving that probably never will.

[IronDanHamza]

Ah Joe Calzaghe....... HATE the guy!

46-0 and with wins over ATG's in Beranrd Hopkins and Roy Jones Jnr on his resume on the surface it seems very impressive. And it is, only to a point tho imo. Of the two best fighters he faced one was past prime but still very good despite his advanced years in B-Hop, but then again i felt Hopkins should have won that and however u slice it it was a debatable result against a 43 year old. The other great fighter he faced was Roy jones. Except it wasnt was it? It was a shadow of his corpse and nothing more. And even HE managed to dump Joe hard on his ass in the first round (as did Hopkins)

Other top wins, Kessler? Mikkel is good but its been reported that he faced Joe with an injured right hand when they battled infront of 50000 spectators in Cardiff, he has since been battered FAR more convincingly by one Andre Ward. And he isnt past his best as some will have u belive he's just not as good as some thought. A good but not great fighter.

Lacy? BUM. End of, he was never any good and Calzaghe exposed him. Big punch good chin but f all else. Lacy was a Hype job and thats that

I'll leave it at that for now on the negative stuff (i could easily go on)
and end the post with some positives

He had a great engine, could adapt mid fight, and recovered well when hurt or dropped, a testiment to his heart and his fitness. Also credit must be given for longevity despite the lack of real quality opposition, its still pretty impressive
Calzaghe also conquered TWO divisions and looked as tho he was still capable of a few more decent wins before he bowed out.

He stuck with his roots throughout his career and never left his father or their ***** box gym in Wales, and he came out with all his senses and an undefeated record

Shouldn't we give the likes of Ottke and Calderon the same credit?

Calzaghe is greater than both of those fighters but if we are giving him credit for his longevity alone regardless to who those defences were against then surely fighters like Ottke should get the same treatment?

[The Surgeon]

Shouldn't we give the likes of Ottke and Calderon the same credit? Calzaghe is greater than both of those fighters but if we are giving him credit for his longevity alone regardless to who those defences were against then surely fighters like Ottke should get the same treatment?

Well we do kind of, Ottke wouldnt otherwise get a mention at all, although some of his decision "wins" are worth umm discussing lol

Between u and me Dan (Dont tell anyone!) i dont like Joe but thought in the intrest of balance and debate i should say SOMETHING positive and i was clutching a tad, dont just want it to be a hate thread u know but then hey if it does turn into a hate thread so be it lol

[crold1]

Well we do kind of, Ottke wouldnt otherwise get a mention at all, although some of his decision "wins" are worth umm discussing lol

Between u and me Dan (Dont tell anyone!) i dont like Joe but thought in the intrest of balance and debate i should say SOMETHING positive and i was clutching a tad, dont just want it to be a hate thread u know but then hey if it does turn into a hate thread so be it lol

Ottke has 4-5 losses on neutral turf. He's slightly more credible than Carnera. The reason he doesn't get the credit Joe does is people saw fights like Reid.

I still stand by my take on Calzaghe: http://www.boxingscene.com/measured-...alzaghe--16920

If he's top 100, he's in the back half and low, but he's a divisional ATG and Super Middleweight is growing a deeper and deeper history all the time. He'll be a factor in discussion of the division for as long as it exists.

[The Surgeon]

Ottke has 4-5 losses on neutral turf. He's slightly more credible than Carnera. The reason he doesn't get the credit Joe does is people saw fights like Reid. I still stand by my take on Calzaghe: http://www.boxingscene.com/measured-...alzaghe--16920 If he's top 100, he's in the back half and low, but he's a divisional ATG and Super Middleweight is growing a deeper and deeper history all the time. He'll be a factor in discussion of the division for as long as it exists.

Good point, SMW is a new division and not really a glamour one at that, but now we are getting a good group in Ward and co and in time i think there will be more and more great fighters in this division, Wards already making a case as to being better than Joe and by the time he's done im confident he will have established that without much doubt

[New England]

Shouldn't we give the likes of Ottke and Calderon the same credit?

Calzaghe is greater than both of those fighters but if we are giving him credit for his longevity alone regardless to who those defences were against then surely fighters like Ottke should get the same treatment?

calderon was a fantastic boxer at his best.

he really was something else. his head doesn't even make it past the top rope.


ottke sucked
he relied on horrible judging and refereeing. he never stepped up in class
he had nothing going for him. i really cant stand the idea that boxers can have careers like his while other more deserving guys endure hardships.


for me calzaghe is somewhere in the middle in terms of what he actually proved. and of course caldron went out on his shield against a superior challenger at the end of his career in what i thought was last years second best fight, giving him a huge boost in my book.
he was a very good fighter
we never got a chance to see how great he was because of the depth of his competition

kessler was his best opponent. at the time people were talking about kessler like he was one of the best kept secrets in boxing, and they really weren't that off. he was a very good fighter. he had physical abilities, one of the best and most active one-two's we've seen of late, a good chin, and was at the top of a huge undefeated run. and calzaghe beat him up.



i'm not going to tell a fighter when to retire, but joe could have gone after bigger fights toward the end of his career, or even came back after a brief retirement.

his skills hadn't seemed to diminish greatly, and there was certainly plenty left to do in terms of building a legacy, even if there were almost no names for him to fight at the time of his retirement as we've discussed in previous threads


i'd probably start my scoffing at lists that place calzaghe anywhere but the 90ish plus level of a top 100 list
i've been hearing that general area from some contemporary writers, and though it's obviously too early to say for sure, i tend to think that's an ok ballpark

in my eyes he doesn't feel like a top 100 fighter
but that's just an opinion
and one that will certainly differ in one direction or the other, or become more concrete as time goes by

[StarshipTrooper]

Uh oh now you've done it Surgeon! You've made a thread sure to bring out all the crazies :chuckle9:

Poet

[The Surgeon]

Uh oh now you've done it Surgeon! You've made a thread sure to bring out all the crazies :chuckle9:

Poet

Lol someone knocked at my door a minute ago and i half expected it to be Joey Zags with a baseball bat!

I thought Calzaghe was a contraversial one and would inspire a passionate debate and i want a Billion points damn it! lol

[$Bullsfam$]

Definitely more Fraud then true all time great.

His title defenses consisted of pretty much...nothing until the last few. 2 of his biggest wins against Reid & Hopkins, he arguably lost and never even tried to rematch because he knows he lost.

On a scale of 1-10 his resume is like a 7.