Your Boxing Hall of Fame ballot

[Scott9945]

Nothing short of absurd for the bold. *Edit, all your font is bold I bolded the last part about getting more votes than Tito.

The general basis on Calzaghe is the "eye test". "He looked amazing".

But how difficult is it to look good against who he was fighting?

Even then, did you see an outstanding fighter against Robin Reid? Or Mitchell? Or Hopkins? I didn't.

The best Calzaghe looked IMO was against Kessler, which was without a doubt a very good win against a good fighter and the best guy in his division (One of his few very good wins) but I mean, how good is Kessler really? On the grand scale?

I'm not trying to bash your view because I highly respect your opinion but surely these things must be considered?

I wouldn't be foolish enough to engage in a debate defending Calzaghe's resume with you or a number of other knowledgeable posters here. I don't remember seeing the Reid fight. Mitchell was an early KO (but admittedly a quick stoppage). And I thought he was a clear winner over Hopkins in what was an ugly fight. But what impressed me were the wins over Lacy and Kessler. It's easy now to crap on Lacy, but he went into the fight undefeated and the betting favorite. Joe absolutely destroyed him and his career. I thought Kessler would beat him and he's proven to be a very solid performer his entire career. Calzaghe completely outfought him and really impressed me by going into a higher gear in the second half of that match.

I'm not saying the guy would have beaten Roy Jones or Andre Ward. Just that he would be a tough out for anyone and not the fraud that many in boxing forums claim he was.

[crold1]

My ten this year were:

Calzaghe
Tito
Oscar
Betulio Gonzalez
Hilarious Zapata
Yoko Gushiken
Harry Jeffra
Ernesto Marcel
Masao Ohba
Nadeem Hamed

I have voted for Kingpetch and Vaquez in the past. Will again in other years. Last year, didn't vote for any of the first ballot guys (then Gatti, Hill, Maske)

[Anthony342]

I wouldn't be foolish enough to engage in a debate defending Calzaghe's resume with you or a number of other knowledgeable posters here. I don't remember seeing the Reid fight. Mitchell was an early KO (but admittedly a quick stoppage). And I thought he was a clear winner over Hopkins in what was an ugly fight. But what impressed me were the wins over Lacy and Kessler. It's easy now to crap on Lacy, but he went into the fight undefeated and the betting favorite. Joe absolutely destroyed him and his career. I thought Kessler would beat him and he's proven to be a very solid performer his entire career. Calzaghe completely outfought him and really impressed me by going into a higher gear in the second half of that match.

I'm not saying the guy would have beaten Roy Jones or Andre Ward. Just that he would be a tough out for anyone and not the fraud that many in boxing forums claim he was.

No, not a prime Jones or Ward.

[IronDanHamza]

I wouldn't be foolish enough to engage in a debate defending Calzaghe's resume with you or a number of other knowledgeable posters here. I don't remember seeing the Reid fight. Mitchell was an early KO (but admittedly a quick stoppage). And I thought he was a clear winner over Hopkins in what was an ugly fight. But what impressed me were the wins over Lacy and Kessler. It's easy now to crap on Lacy, but he went into the fight undefeated and the betting favorite. Joe absolutely destroyed him and his career. I thought Kessler would beat him and he's proven to be a very solid performer his entire career. Calzaghe completely outfought him and really impressed me by going into a higher gear in the second half of that match.

I'm not saying the guy would have beaten Roy Jones or Andre Ward. Just that he would be a tough out for anyone and not the fraud that many in boxing forums claim he was.

I and many others felt he lost the Reid fight, he say's his hand was injured (Convenient), against Mitchell he was dropped and looked average at best against a fringe contender.

Hopkins was still good despite well passed his best, there's no shame in struggling with him. Perhaps a little bit of shame being legitimately dropped by him though. It was a close fight and again there's no shame in that but he really looked awful in that fight.

I don't see what's impressive about the Lacy fight. It was just as easy to crap on that fight before it as it was after it. It's decent at very best. Lacy is terrible and that was clear to see before the Calzaghe fight when he was struggling badly with fringe contenders.

The only win he has a over a prime, top solid fighter is Kessler and let's face it Kessler is a good fighter but it's hardly that impressive in the grand scheme of things.

I don't think Calzaghe did anything to show he'd be a tough out for anyone. Struggling badly with a 46 year old Hopkins doesn't tell me that.

He's so far from being an ATG it's ridiculous and when he get's inducted to the HOF he'll be amongst the weakest members in there.

[IronDanHamza]

My ten this year were:

Calzaghe
Tito
Oscar
Betulio Gonzalez
Hilarious Zapata
Yoko Gushiken
Harry Jeffra
Ernesto Marcel
Masao Ohba
Nadeem Hamed

I have voted for Kingpetch and Vaquez in the past. Will again in other years. Last year, didn't vote for any of the first ballot guys (then Gatti, Hill, Maske)

Voting for most of those guys over Kingpetch is criminal.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I don't see that at all or even close.

I don't consider him a lock for the HOF either. I consider him borderline.

He will without doubt get in on this first Ballot, but I certainly wouldn't vote for him.

Then who would be your top 10 p4p since 2000

You can say floyd, roy pre-tarver, manny,,, I do think that jmm and serg would be tough matchups for joe,, but i think joe would beat MAB, winky, donaire, froch, and pretty much every fighter not named floyd, manny, roy,,

No, not a prime Jones or Ward.

I honestly think joe would be a style nightmare for ward,,, Joe keeps a high pace and uses angles, and i think he would catch ward alot and step off to the side, utilizing his southpaw stance,, I think ward would tire down the stretch and i think joe could beat him,, probably a split decision either way,, I just think ward is a little to stationary like a toney or broner, and he doesnt have great movement like roy, floyd hopkins.. I think its a 50/50 fight but style wise i think joe had the work-rate and the key ability to "steal" rounds, and he would do enough to get past ward,,,
The guys i think would beat Joe would be floyd, manny, jones 00-02, hopkins and ward would be 50/50 fights,,, Serg and JMM would both cause joe problems but for different reasons,,,
Serg's movement and southpaw would bother joe, and jmm ability to eat punches and deliver beautiful counter combos would cause joe alot of problems,,

but outside of the guys i mentioned,, i think joe would beat everyone else,,
he outworks froch, winky, dawson, adamek, MAB, morales, tsyzu, etc

[RubenSonny]

I wouldn't be foolish enough to engage in a debate defending Calzaghe's resume with you or a number of other knowledgeable posters here. I don't remember seeing the Reid fight. Mitchell was an early KO (but admittedly a quick stoppage). And I thought he was a clear winner over Hopkins in what was an ugly fight. But what impressed me were the wins over Lacy and Kessler. It's easy now to crap on Lacy, but he went into the fight undefeated and the betting favorite. Joe absolutely destroyed him and his career. I thought Kessler would beat him and he's proven to be a very solid performer his entire career. Calzaghe completely outfought him and really impressed me by going into a higher gear in the second half of that match.

I'm not saying the guy would have beaten Roy Jones or Andre Ward. Just that he would be a tough out for anyone and not the fraud that many in boxing forums claim he was.

Why would he be a tough out for anyone? There are many fighters in history who would destroy Kessler with no problems, I don't see how beating him in a competitive fight makes you difficult for anyone, there are so many levels above Kessler and even more above Lacy.

[Humean]

I and many others felt he lost the Reid fight, he say's his hand was injured (Convenient), against Mitchell he was dropped and looked average at best against a fringe contender.

Hopkins was still good despite well passed his best, there's no shame in struggling with him. Perhaps a little bit of shame being legitimately dropped by him though. It was a close fight and again there's no shame in that but he really looked awful in that fight.

I don't see what's impressive about the Lacy fight. It was just as easy to crap on that fight before it as it was after it. It's decent at very best. Lacy is terrible and that was clear to see before the Calzaghe fight when he was struggling badly with fringe contenders.

The only win he has a over a prime, top solid fighter is Kessler and let's face it Kessler is a good fighter but it's hardly that impressive in the grand scheme of things.

I don't think Calzaghe did anything to show he'd be a tough out for anyone. Struggling badly with a 46 year old Hopkins doesn't tell me that.

He's so far from being an ATG it's ridiculous and when he get's inducted to the HOF he'll be amongst the weakest members in there.

Lacy was knocking out all these fringe contenders, hardly struggling. Lacy was no doubt overrated going in, a common occurance when evaluating big punchers but Calzaghe schooled him as comprehensively as I have seen a title holder be schooled. I just cannot fathom how you can claim that that wasn't impressive.

The Calzaghe Hopkins fight was fairly close and it was ugly but who else beat Hopkins fighting that aggressively always moving forward? Hopkins was spoiling even more than usual. This was an impressive win as asthetically displeasing as it was.

Kessler was indeed his greatest performance. The super middleweight division has of course not been around for long but if you look over the course of it I think you can make a case for Kessler in the top 10 greatest super middleweights. Probably just outside the top 10 in terms of how good he was, someone like Jones wasn't in the division long enough (2 years) perhaps to even be ahead of Kessler in terms of greatness in the division. So I think you are greatly diminishing the Kessler win. Look how Froch did against Kessler in his two fights, two very close fights, the Calzaghe-Kessler fight was only close in the first half and then Calzaghe completely pulled away and dominated Kessler with his boxing.

You are definitely being harsh with your evaluation of Calzaghe. I agree with Sugar Adam Ali that he is pretty much only definitely behind Mayweather and Pacquiao as the best since around 2000, top 5 p4p since 2000.

[crold1]

Voting for most of those guys over Kingpetch is criminal.

I disagree on criminality but probably should have switched him out with someone like Marcel. Once to ballot is mailed, I often debate again in my head all year. It doesn't matter insomuch as The three first year guys are all going in easy this year. I don't think I voted for anyone who doesn't belong. I've waffled on King in the past. Some great wins, bad losses, and a little home cooking along the way. He belongs in; should have been in years ago and well before someone like Johnson.

Acavallo, Ebihara, and Laciar should all be inducted eventually as well IMO

[IronDanHamza]

Lacy was knocking out all these fringe contenders, hardly struggling. Lacy was no doubt overrated going in, a common occurance when evaluating big punchers but Calzaghe schooled him as comprehensively as I have seen a title holder be schooled. I just cannot fathom how you can claim that that wasn't impressive.

The only contender he fought was Omar Sheika and he struggled badly.

Convenient that he knocks out all of these bums and washed up fighters then steps up to decent level opposition and looks terrible.

I don't consider beating Jeff Lacy as an impressive victory. The guy is one of the worst title holders in recent memory.

The Calzaghe Hopkins fight was fairly close and it was ugly but who else beat Hopkins fighting that aggressively always moving forward? Hopkins was spoiling even more than usual. This was an impressive win as asthetically displeasing as it was.

It's a good win, one of his few.

Still, he didn't look impressive at all.

Kessler was indeed his greatest performance. The super middleweight division has of course not been around for long but if you look over the course of it I think you can make a case for Kessler in the top 10 greatest super middleweights. Probably just outside the top 10 in terms of how good he was, someone like Jones wasn't in the division long enough (2 years) perhaps to even be ahead of Kessler in terms of greatness in the division. So I think you are greatly diminishing the Kessler win. Look how Froch did against Kessler in his two fights, two very close fights, the Calzaghe-Kessler fight was only close in the first half and then Calzaghe completely pulled away and dominated Kessler with his boxing.

I don't think evaulating how weak the Super Middleweight Division is historically is making a case for Kessler being some great win. It's a solid win over the best fighter in the division at the time and he get's credit for that. But it's still Kessler when it all boils down to it.

You are definitely being harsh with your evaluation of Calzaghe. I agree with Sugar Adam Ali that he is pretty much only definitely behind Mayweather and Pacquiao as the best since around 2000, top 5 p4p since 2000.

I'm not being harsh at all. Why? Because I'm not singing his praises?

I'm telling the truth, his resume is a joke.

Saying the only fighters ahead of him in the last era are Pacquaio and Mayweather is just absolutely absurd. Beyond absurd.