**** Calzaghe Haters

[abadger]

Joe Calzaghe is the best MW-LHW of this era and probably all-time. That's why he has so many haters.

"Prime" Jones is as much a myth as "prime" Tyson. That's just a lame excuse for nut-hugger's to pretend that their boys getting KTFO never happened.

I really think thats an excellent point. Every performance in a boxers career counts towards their final standing and we can't just pick and choose the periods and fights we like when we try to assess them. Jones DID get KTFO by Tarver twice, as well as by Glen Johnson!.

The only two fighters in the world that stand up to that kind of scrutiny right now are Mayweather and Calzaghe, which is the reason they are simultaneously two of the most loved and two of the most hated.

[βetamax]

Joe would have beaten Hopkins any time in their careers. In his prime Hopkins actually used to box, and Joe would have beaten him more easily because it would have been a much more open fight. I doubt Joe would have beaten prime Roy, but he would have had a chance.

As for 'who is Kessler?', statements like that are just symptomatic of the USA only focus you see from US fighters and fans. In fact Kessler was a two belt undefeated champ, who had beaten the best in the SMW division bar Joe, and who most agree is a genuinely top class boxer, with incredible power and excellent technique. Just because he isn't from the US, and prominent in US eyes, doesn't make him a nobody. The USA is afflicted with exactly the same kind of 'homerism' that it ritually accuses the rest of the world of, with fans tending only to know and care about their home fighters, who it believes are better than everybody else, even when they aren't. I seriously doubt Hopkins really considers Kessler a nobody, I bet he wouldn't like to fight him, what he said is just trash talk. As boxing fans we owe it to the sport to rise above our home fighter allegiances and assess boxers objectively using the evidence of our eyes.

As for Hopkins being 'old', well he has been 'old' for most of his elite career. Most of his best wins came after 36 and the Winky and Tarver fights were not that long ago at all, and many describe those as two of the biggest wins that contribute to Hopkins 'legend' status. If we are to accept the notion that these two were elites and Hopkins gets a ton of credit for beating them, then Calzaghe should get the credit for beating him, and doing what Winky and Tarver couldn't. Hopkins is not the same fighter he was, but he is technically and tactically better now than he was, and I think the Hopkins we saw against Joe would be a match for most other LHWs out there. Again, Joe should get the credit for beating him.

Finally, Joe's record. The bottom line here is that Joe did take on all the top SMWs he could have during his career. The quality of the fighters on his resume is as good as most of those on Hopkins and Jones resumes, but the latter two do have those few more famous names that elevate their lists a little. Joe is in the process of acquiring those names right now, and doing so successfully. Joe's record is not suspect at all. If I wanted to I could flip the logic of the argument around and say that all the supposed greats like Tarver, Winky and even Jones have one name missing from their resumes, Joe Calzaghe. It is Joe who is the two weight Ring champ right now, so you could argue that he is the great, not them.

Just saying.

I don't buy the argument that Hopkins is somehow a better fighter now then years ago. He's adapted the style he has now due to what he's lost in physical abilities, not because he discovered it to be more effective. If Calzaghe couldn't hit Hopkins at 43 when he did open up, what would make you think he could do the same to a Hopkins of 10 years ago?

[abadger]

I don't buy the argument that Hopkins is somehow a better fighter now then years ago. He's adapted the style he has now due to what he's lost in physical abilities, not because he discovered it to be more effective. If Calzaghe couldn't hit Hopkins at 43 when he did open up, what would make you think he could do the same to a Hopkins of 10 years ago?

I don't think Hopkins is better now either. I do think the Hopkins we see now has a style more suited to beating Joe than the Hopkins of old though, what made Hopkins hard to hit was not any incredible defense, but basically just a lot of smothering and clinching, which Hopkins did less of in the past. Thats why I think Joe beats him anytime.

[tyson]

I don't think Hopkins is better now either. I do think the Hopkins we see now has a style more suited to beating Joe than the Hopkins of old though, what made Hopkins hard to hit was not any incredible defense, but basically just a lot of smothering and clinching, which Hopkins did less of in the past. Thats why I think Joe beats him anytime.

I forgive you too.

[abadger]

I forgive you too.

Will I go to heaven now?

[Vladimir303]

If Joe was from the US, probably Mozza wouldn't think of him as a legend, its natural, if not always desirable to support and look out for your 'hometown fighter' as it were.

I'll tell you something though, if Joe were from the US, the US fans would be hugging his nuts harder than any have been hugged before. He would be their most popular fighter easily, and he'd be acclaimed as a legend from now until the end of time.

I guarantee it.

American fans don't have the same national pride towards fighters as Brits.
And joe for fighting like a ***** fighting his way out of spider webs would get ridiculed no matter where he's from.

[tyson]

Will I go to heaven now?

Not going to happen anytime soon.

[Vladimir303]

I don't think Hopkins is better now either. I do think the Hopkins we see now has a style more suited to beating Joe than the Hopkins of old though, what made Hopkins hard to hit was not any incredible defense, but basically just a lot of smothering and clinching, which Hopkins did less of in the past. Thats why I think Joe beats him anytime.

That is just a terrible post.

The hopkins of old was more accurate and that right hand that landed in the 1st would have landed alot more had he been in his prime.

Hopkins has always been dirty, the only thing changed in 2008 is that he lost his offense.

[abadger]

American fans don't have the same national pride towards fighters as Brits.
And joe for fighting like a ***** fighting his way out of spider webs would get ridiculed no matter where he's from.

Americans are worse than the rest of the world when it comes to overestimating their own fighters, although I accept that this can often include boxers who box out of America too, and include Mexicans, Puerto Ricans etc.

It's not so much national pride that you have, more a belief that the entire world of boxing is basically the US and an at times amazing disregard for other fighters. Virtually every single elite fighter you have, once they pass a certain point in their careers is acclaimed as a legend, no matter how often they actually lose. Look at Hopkins, Jones, Winky, Trinidad, Toney, even Tarver! At times US fans act like these guys never lost a fight in their life,
continually saying, your guy will never beat my amazing legendary legend (even though he's lost his last two fights!)

You certainly don't extend this incredible willingness to forgive defeats to non-US and particularly European fighters. Every loss by a European proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he is a bum!

So no, its not national pride exactly, more a huge and overweaning national sense of entitlement and presumed superiority, combined with an almost wilful disregard for the achievements of boxers from any other nation.

Not trying to stir anything up, just saying!

[abadger]

That is just a terrible post.

The hopkins of old was more accurate and that right hand that landed in the 1st would have landed alot more had he been in his prime.

Hopkins has always been dirty, the only thing changed in 2008 is that he lost his offense.

If you say so...

The fabled right hand of Hopkins will cut through space and time and destroy Calzaghe somehow, someway...

...even if, you know, it didn't.