O.k., here is my contention:
Joe C is a good, not great fighter. His best win, IMO, is Kessler. In order to be considered a great fighter in my eyes, you need to beat other great fighters in their prime. Joe simply hasn't done that. Kessler is Joe's best win, but I don't consider Kessler a great fighter by any means. Moving on...
Joe's other good wins include: Bernard Hopkins-Hop was 43, and a former shade of himself, but it's still a good win. But, I was unimpressed with how Joe went about getting that win. It was pretty obvious Bernard didn't have much fight in him in that fight. If Joe was so great, he would've handled Bernard more easily. Joe didn't make the adjustments in that fight to make it easier for him and that's what a great fighter would've been able to do. Looking less than impressive against an old Hopkins leaves much to be desired.
Jeff Lacy- Jeff was not some kind of great champion. Who did Jeff beat to get his titles? Syd Vanderpool for the IBF strap. Does anyone consider Syd to be a great fighter? I didn't think so. And, Lacy earned the IBO Belt from a washed-up Reid. So, those were Lacy's biggest wins going into the Calzaghe fight-hardly screams out great fighter. Jeff may have been in his prime, but I do not consider him to be worthy of people saying this is a "great" win on Joe's resume. It simply does not compute.
Robin Reid- I admit, I've never seen this fight. However, I've heard on more than one ocassion that it was a gift decision for Joe. But, it's a win, and you have to give Joe credit for that. It's not a great win however. Why? Because Reid was not a great fighter IMO.
Chris Eubank- Ah, "Simply The Best'. It sure was fun watching this guy fight when he was in his prime. Too bad the Joe C. fight wasn't one of those "prime" fights, because Chris would've KO'd Joe no questions asked. Some say, "Well, Eubank was only 31 when they fought". Well, my response to that is, Eubank turned pro when he was 19 and Joe C was his 50th pro fight. I think it's safe to say Eubank wasn't in his prime when he fought Joe. Was Eubank a great fighter? Yes, but not when he fought Joe he wasn't. He was past it, and I don't think that's something that can really be argued.
Moving along...
Joe captured the WBO belt in 97 yet didn't capture another belt for 10 years. Why is that? No, seriously, why is that? I would like some answers as to why Joe never challenged Frankie Liles in '96 or '97 for his WBA crown. That was a fight that should've been made yet it never came to fruition. My guess is, Joe didn't want none. He knew he would get outboxed by the southpaw Liles.
Also, why did Joe C never get it on with RJJ, the best boxer of the 90's arguably? Could it be that Joe and his camp knew Joe would get outclassed? Joe had plenty of time to try and capture Jones' IBF strap yet it never happened. Once again, I believe this fight never got made because Joe knew he would lose. It's much safer to fight Omar Sheika, I get it.
And, what about the Supermiddle WBC belt in the mid-to-late 90's and even in the new millenium. Why did Joe never challenge for it until Kessler? That belt changed hands so many times I couldn't even count. Was Joe afraid to fight Thulani Malinga and Richie Woodhall??? I'm just really stumped as to why Joe never went after the WBC belt before the Kessler fight. It doesn't make sense to me why a "supposed" great fighter would not challenge himself but rather fight in his own backyard for most of his career and choose to defend his WBO belt. Also, if memory serves me correct, he only faced ONE mandatory in his 10 years as champ of that WBO belt-don't quote me on it though.
I guess that's about it. I believe I've made a very good case for why Joe shouldn't be considered a great fighter. One good win over a prime Kessler does not make you an all-time great. It simply doesn't.
Joe C is a good, not great fighter. His best win, IMO, is Kessler. In order to be considered a great fighter in my eyes, you need to beat other great fighters in their prime. Joe simply hasn't done that. Kessler is Joe's best win, but I don't consider Kessler a great fighter by any means. Moving on...
Joe's other good wins include: Bernard Hopkins-Hop was 43, and a former shade of himself, but it's still a good win. But, I was unimpressed with how Joe went about getting that win. It was pretty obvious Bernard didn't have much fight in him in that fight. If Joe was so great, he would've handled Bernard more easily. Joe didn't make the adjustments in that fight to make it easier for him and that's what a great fighter would've been able to do. Looking less than impressive against an old Hopkins leaves much to be desired.
Jeff Lacy- Jeff was not some kind of great champion. Who did Jeff beat to get his titles? Syd Vanderpool for the IBF strap. Does anyone consider Syd to be a great fighter? I didn't think so. And, Lacy earned the IBO Belt from a washed-up Reid. So, those were Lacy's biggest wins going into the Calzaghe fight-hardly screams out great fighter. Jeff may have been in his prime, but I do not consider him to be worthy of people saying this is a "great" win on Joe's resume. It simply does not compute.
Robin Reid- I admit, I've never seen this fight. However, I've heard on more than one ocassion that it was a gift decision for Joe. But, it's a win, and you have to give Joe credit for that. It's not a great win however. Why? Because Reid was not a great fighter IMO.
Chris Eubank- Ah, "Simply The Best'. It sure was fun watching this guy fight when he was in his prime. Too bad the Joe C. fight wasn't one of those "prime" fights, because Chris would've KO'd Joe no questions asked. Some say, "Well, Eubank was only 31 when they fought". Well, my response to that is, Eubank turned pro when he was 19 and Joe C was his 50th pro fight. I think it's safe to say Eubank wasn't in his prime when he fought Joe. Was Eubank a great fighter? Yes, but not when he fought Joe he wasn't. He was past it, and I don't think that's something that can really be argued.
Moving along...
Joe captured the WBO belt in 97 yet didn't capture another belt for 10 years. Why is that? No, seriously, why is that? I would like some answers as to why Joe never challenged Frankie Liles in '96 or '97 for his WBA crown. That was a fight that should've been made yet it never came to fruition. My guess is, Joe didn't want none. He knew he would get outboxed by the southpaw Liles.
Also, why did Joe C never get it on with RJJ, the best boxer of the 90's arguably? Could it be that Joe and his camp knew Joe would get outclassed? Joe had plenty of time to try and capture Jones' IBF strap yet it never happened. Once again, I believe this fight never got made because Joe knew he would lose. It's much safer to fight Omar Sheika, I get it.
And, what about the Supermiddle WBC belt in the mid-to-late 90's and even in the new millenium. Why did Joe never challenge for it until Kessler? That belt changed hands so many times I couldn't even count. Was Joe afraid to fight Thulani Malinga and Richie Woodhall??? I'm just really stumped as to why Joe never went after the WBC belt before the Kessler fight. It doesn't make sense to me why a "supposed" great fighter would not challenge himself but rather fight in his own backyard for most of his career and choose to defend his WBO belt. Also, if memory serves me correct, he only faced ONE mandatory in his 10 years as champ of that WBO belt-don't quote me on it though.
I guess that's about it. I believe I've made a very good case for why Joe shouldn't be considered a great fighter. One good win over a prime Kessler does not make you an all-time great. It simply doesn't.
Comment