Calzaghe was NOT in his prime between 2002 and 2004

[abadger]

Does losing your punch make you automatically past your best? Thats the only thing that has went down, and thats because his hand are fragile. Not because hes old or anything. He has not showed any signs of slowing down or any wear and tear. His boxing skills are a lot better now then when he was fighting back in the early 90s- early 2000s. The brave Calzaghe that punched harder back then would have probably lost to Lacy and Kessler because his foot speed wasn't as good back then and he relied more on his punching power. Now he is more of a slick boxer that throws volume punches, back then he was a boxer puncher that was more vulnerable.

I understand what you mean, and all question of Joe's prime are very hard to answer, exactly because he has essentially been two different fighters in the course of his career. For me though, he does look like his lost handspeed, a little bit of the dynamism he used to have, and power as we've discussed.

I don't think the Calzaghe we see today is as good as the one we saw against Lacy, although I hope we might see a performance like that again.

No-one is immune from aging and at almost 37, I don't see how Calzaghe can be anything than beginning to decline. I hope I'm wrong.

[CardioMonster]

i think Calzaghe is as good as he ever was, he hasn`t lost speed. The one thing he has lost is punching power due to his fragile hands. It almost ended his career after all.

I dont think any version of Calzaghe loses to Lacy. Calzaghe didn`t just use foot speed to beat Lacy, the main factor in that fight imo was that he simply stopped Lacy working on the inside by ducking and slipping Lacy's shots whilst countering him with his own short, chopping hooks, uppercuts and one-twos.

[sterling]

What a dum ass thread listen calzaghe is past his prime and his prime was when he was in his 20's lol i would say eubank fight.