Your Boxing Hall of Fame ballot

[IronDanHamza]

Joe calzaghe should get credit for being a 2 division lineal champ,,,,,,,,

people act like the dude was a bum,, and yes he took alot of soft touches, but he has clear wins over undefeated prime kessler, undefeated prime lacy-and he ruined lacy, hopkins, bika, eubanks,,

say what you will about joe, but the facts are-when faced with top level competition, he stepped up and won

he had a great workrate, huge will to win, and made great adjustments,, if he was some bum with a padded record he would never been a 2 division lineal champ

can anybody name another "bum" that was undefeated, unified at 4 belts in one division, and then moved up and beat an ATG for another lineal strap,,,,,, that is not something a bum does,,

if joe was just hype, kessler or lacy or bika or hopkins would have easily beat him,,,,

did joe take some easy fights-- easy, about 85% were hand picked guys, but when it mattered most, he stepped up and dominated, and he was always gave 100%

why joe gets hated on so much is beyond me,,, I think he was a great fighter of his era and since 2000 was probably a top 5 p4p behind floyd, manny, ward

Of course he's not a bum.

He's just far from an All Time Great.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Of course he's not a bum.

He's just far from an All Time Great.

True, he isnt an ATG, but he was a damn good fighter and a lock for the HOF,,,

and p4p since 2000 i think he was better than everyone but ward, floyd and manny,,,

p4p H2H i think he beats jmm, serg, winky, shane, cotto, dawson, adamek bradley, froch, etc


He didnt take the big fights till late in his career, but at his peak 03-08 i think he is vastly underrated,,,

while roy jones was struggling with tarver, i thought joe would smoke tarver,

I thought he was the best guy at 168 and at 175.................



Sorry for my rant,,, i am just fed up with all the calzaghe bashing, especially on NSB

[Humean]

Holman Williams and Charley Burley are obvious all time great's.

I can understand the notion of the inconsistency. Like most of that era, they had a lot of inconsistency.

Take Emile Griffith who's era's later, look at his inconsistency even through his best years in the 60's, littered with inconsistency but he's still an all time great for the high caliber of fighters he defeated.

Lytell and Booker beat great fighters, on multiple occasions. People who have beaten who they have beaten should be HOF'ers.

As for Calzaghe, the notion that he's "clearly great" as opposed to Lytell and Booker is hilarious to me. The notion he's "clearly great" alone is hilarious to me, in fact.

You say what I'm saying in regards to the ranked contenders he beat is nonsense, I'd say the term "fact" is more fitting.

Joe Calzaghe across his entire career fought 3 fighters who were in the Top 5 ranked fighters in the division being fought in (According to The Ring Magazine), his resume is absolutely awful and he is absolutely not a great fighter.

I think this is correct but if you use your ring magazine top 5 ratings then Booker and Lytell beat the following top 5 rated although not necessarily top 5 when they beat them:

Booker 2
1. Holman Williams
2. Moore - Moore was not ranked in top 10 the year that Booker beat him nor the year before but was number 1 at light heavy the end of the year after in 1945.


Lytell 4
1. Cocoa Kid was only ever ranked top 5 at welter and wasn't in the top 10 at middleweight in the years lytell beat him, indeed he was only ranked in the top 10 at middleweight in one year.
2. Burley
3. Williams
4. Basora but hadn't been in top 10 for about 4 years.

Calzaghe 9
1. Eubank - Hadn't been rated top 5 since 1994, fought 1997, former title holder
2. Reid - rated 2 1997, 6 1998, fought 1999, former title holder
3. Woodhall - rated 3 1998, 9 1999, fought 2000, former title holder
4. Brewer - rated 5 2001, 6 2002, fought 2002, former title holder
5. Mitchell, rated 3 2001, 5 2002, 6 2003, fought 2003, former title holder
6. Lacy, rated 3 2005, 3 2006, fought 2006, former title holder
7. Bika, rated 5 2009, fought 2006, current title holder
8. Kessler, rated 1 2006, 1 2007, fought 2007, former title holder
9. Hopkins, was ring magazine light heavyweight champ, current title holder
...10...Roy....OK i'll leave that one out.


Calzaghe would maybe not be in my top 100, but he would figure somewhere between 100-130. If that means he's not great then i'm fine with that but I think you are being ridiculously harsh. A harshness that seems at odds with how kind you are on Booker and Lytell.

[Humean]

Whales, England whatever.............Mexico, Southern Calif..........apples oranges..............don't care. The guys he was stopping he could have done that with slapping. Listen if yoiu think he's great thats fine. To me he is a slick boxer who beat everyone his people put in front of him but he didn't fight any great fighters!
No different than Sergio or Mayweather with the exception of Mayweather "catching a few" (Marquez) and weighing them up! HA!!!

Most fighters have damaged hands, its not a big deal if you know how to care for them.
If they were that bad then retire and don't let your fans use it as an excuse!

I w****d hands for 45 years guys with fingers distored, wrists like lace, knuckles pertruding or missing! High spots low spots, when your stuick with a certain amount of gause you can use from state to state you come to me and lets how you would do it? I made my keep working fights, getting some of the best polished, keeping some of the best trial horses safe, closing trouble around eyes, in scalps and busted ears.
yeah I know a little about hands, what do you know? Ray.

You can watch his stoppages on youtube, he did also knock Eubank down which was no easy thing to do. I know pretty much every boxer has hand problems, the human hand has not evolved to be used the way boxers use them but Calzaghe's hands were bad enough to change his style. As I said it was not just Calzaghe whining about the pain which seems to be what you were asserting.

[IronDanHamza]

I think this is correct but if you use your ring magazine top 5 ratings then Booker and Lytell beat the following top 5 rated although not necessarily top 5 when they beat them:

Booker 2
1. Holman Williams
2. Moore - Moore was not ranked in top 10 the year that Booker beat him nor the year before but was number 1 at light heavy the end of the year after in 1945.


Lytell 4
1. Cocoa Kid was only ever ranked top 5 at welter and wasn't in the top 10 at middleweight in the years lytell beat him, indeed he was only ranked in the top 10 at middleweight in one year.
2. Burley
3. Williams
4. Basora but hadn't been in top 10 for about 4 years.

Calzaghe 9
1. Eubank - Hadn't been rated top 5 since 1994, fought 1997, former title holder
2. Reid - rated 2 1997, 6 1998, fought 1999, former title holder
3. Woodhall - rated 3 1998, 9 1999, fought 2000, former title holder
4. Brewer - rated 5 2001, 6 2002, fought 2002, former title holder
5. Mitchell, rated 3 2001, 5 2002, 6 2003, fought 2003, former title holder
6. Lacy, rated 3 2005, 3 2006, fought 2006, former title holder
7. Bika, rated 5 2009, fought 2006, current title holder
8. Kessler, rated 1 2006, 1 2007, fought 2007, former title holder
9. Hopkins, was ring magazine light heavyweight champ, current title holder
...10...Roy....OK i'll leave that one out.


Calzaghe would maybe not be in my top 100, but he would figure somewhere between 100-130. If that means he's not great then i'm fine with that but I think you are being ridiculously harsh. A harshness that seems at odds with how kind you are on Booker and Lytell.

Fighters fought much more often then so it's difficult to gauge.

And I don't where I'm being harsh, all I'm saying is Calzaghe isn't an all time great which to me is glaringly obvious.

I didn't say anything about Booker and Lytell being All Time Great's. What I did say, is both are obvious choices for the HOF. Which they are.

[Humean]

Fighters fought much more often then so it's difficult to gauge.

And I don't where I'm being harsh, all I'm saying is Calzaghe isn't an all time great which to me is glaringly obvious.

I didn't say anything about Booker and Lytell being All Time Great's. What I did say, is both are obvious choices for the HOF. Which they are.

That you think that Booker and Lytell should be in ahead of Calzaghe is harsh on Calzaghe and you seem to think they should be in ahead of a number of guys on this ballot. I simply think there must be a whole host of other fighters as deserving, or more than Lytell and Booker. You said Calzaghe's resume was garbage and you seem to place an enormous amount of weight on a fighter's resume therefore you seem to be implying more than that he was not great.

[IronDanHamza]

That you think that Booker and Lytell should be in ahead of Calzaghe is harsh on Calzaghe and you seem to think they should be in ahead of a number of guys on this ballot. I simply think there must be a whole host of other fighters as deserving, or more than Lytell and Booker. You said Calzaghe's resume was garbage and you seem to place an enormous amount of weight on a fighter's resume therefore you seem to be implying more than that he was not great.

I don't think it's harsh. Their resume's are much better so I wouldn't say it's harsh.

I don't see where I mention they should be ahead of a number of guys on the Ballot. I haven't even looked on the Ballot.

All I do know is Trinidad, Oscar and Kingpetch are on the Ballot and they would be the three from this list on this thread that I would vote for and should be the three from this list getting in.

I don't see where I'm implying more than that. When saying his resume is weak, I'm talking in comparison to others.

He's far from an All Time Great, is all I am saying.

[Scott9945]

True, he isnt an ATG, but he was a damn good fighter and a lock for the HOF,,,

and p4p since 2000 i think he was better than everyone but ward, floyd and manny,,,

p4p H2H i think he beats jmm, serg, winky, shane, cotto, dawson, adamek bradley, froch, etc


He didnt take the big fights till late in his career, but at his peak 03-08 i think he is vastly underrated,,,

while roy jones was struggling with tarver, i thought joe would smoke tarver,

I thought he was the best guy at 168 and at 175.................



Sorry for my rant,,, i am just fed up with all the calzaghe bashing, especially on NSB

I usually go by my own eyes ahead of resume. And Calzaghe proved to me that he was an outstanding fighter. But if I'm being honest, his resume kinda sucks. I voted for him on this poll, but I'm very surprised that he got more votes than Trinidad.

[IronDanHamza]

I usually go by my own eyes ahead of resume. And Calzaghe proved to me that he was an outstanding fighter. But if I'm being honest, his resume kinda sucks. I voted for him on this poll, but I'm very surprised that he got more votes than Trinidad.

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?

[IronDanHamza]

True, he isnt an ATG, but he was a damn good fighter and a lock for the HOF,,,

and p4p since 2000 i think he was better than everyone but ward, floyd and manny,,,

p4p H2H i think he beats jmm, serg, winky, shane, cotto, dawson, adamek bradley, froch, etc


He didnt take the big fights till late in his career, but at his peak 03-08 i think he is vastly underrated,,,

while roy jones was struggling with tarver, i thought joe would smoke tarver,

I thought he was the best guy at 168 and at 175.................



Sorry for my rant,,, i am just fed up with all the calzaghe bashing, especially on NSB

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.