5Burowz vs. MajesticC for Joe Cal supremacy

[majestiC]

The point of this post is to show that even the best modern era boxers do not have these amazing histories where they beat champ after champ, we just come to think they do as we accept their 'great' status. Mostly they just beat the better fighters in their respective divisions as well as lots of lower class ones too. Calzaghe, Hopkins, Jones and Toney all did this and each have their own standout wins, but each record has much to recommend it in different ways, easily enough for all of them to be considered greats.

Pretty much somes it all up

[majestiC]

Sup Tech Skill hows it going long time no see ?

[abadger]

As I said, all of Toney, Jones and Hopkins are great fighters, but that doesn't mean Calzaghe isn't. I might even agree that Toney and Jones have definitively better resumes, but those sorts of judgements are pretty subjective, your opinion that Nunn was a great when I think he was just good etc. Quality of opposition is always debatable, but even if we agree that all of these three have better wins, what you are persistently ignoring is that they ALL have worse losses, since Calzaghe has none.

You can't just pick and choose which fights to look at when assessing fighters, every supposed 'great' on earth other than Calzaghe and Mayweather has suffered losses that would instantly see Joe derided as exposed. People don't like to admit it but its true. Calzaghe has dominated his division without a single mistake for ten years and is now undefeated at two weights. You can't just look past this, the point of boxing is to win fights, avoid losses, acquire titles and defend them. Joe Calzaghe has a perfect record at this.

I know you all think that you're being clever by deriding calzaghe, but you aren't. You are merely exposing a prejudice against him. I mean, why is it that you need to post threads saying that probably the world's most currently dominant boxer is no good? He clearly is. I do not see any need to say that fighters like Hopkins, Toney, and Jones aren't great, but I don't mind a bit of realism about their records. I think you could all benefit from a little realism about what calzaghe has done in his career, which no other fighter has been capable of doing.

[Xplosivo]

Kessler is the 2nd best super middleweight in the last decade



he wasn't a shade of his former self he beat Tarver and Winky Wright the fight before. Every fight has looked bad vs Hopkins even Roy Jones Jr, styles make fights. A younger Hopkins would of made a better fight as he would have thrown more but also would have left himself more open...just like Hopkins says.



Before the fight 95% of the boxing community said Lacy would KO and destroy Joe, it was one of the most dominate performances at world level ever. Lacy was no2 some peoples no1 in the division at the time.



Joe won the fight just, he struggled because he broke his hand, Reid was a very underrated fighter back in the day and held the WBC title for a while.



It can be argued, Eubank was only 31, ok he wasn't the same fighter after the Watson fight but name me one fighter who's first 12 rounder was with someone of Eubanks level?



Joe's only 12 rounder back then was with Eubank, who knows why the fight didn't come of. Joe was a young pro just starting out back then...



Joe never had the finacial backing to get someone like RJJ back in the day the only way he could force the fight was if he became mandatory but Jones moved up in weight.




Joe beat Richie Woodhall, plus Woodhall was a weight down from super middle for most of his career. Ottke had the rest of the belts and going to Germany to fight Ottke would be ****ing insane.....

1. so kessler beat a guy that sven ottke KO'd but he is the 2nd greatest in the past 10 years? what is his biggest win and what did you put him as the 2nd best based on? coz he hasnt achieved it yet


2. thats why hopkins is a great fighter, even being a shade of his former self he was able to beat elite fighters and give calzaghe a close fight at the age of 43, prime hopkins would win no doubt.

3. dumb yanks picked lacy to win, open the predictions page from boxingscene writers, it was 60-40 in favour of lacy, the sensible ones picked calzaghe, tell me even if he was a hype job who did he beat? because he didnt beat sheikha imo just a body builder who was slow as hell. i picked calzaghe by tko in 5 rounds after watching atleast 3 fights of calzaghe and lacy.

4. i will upload the fight for you, there is no way calzaghe deserved the W in that fight, it was reid's fight and a gift for joe.

5. losing to steve collins is end of story. eubank was pretty much done after 1993 and he fought calzaghe i think in 1997 after losing to a horrible fighter in steve collins, who people praise by looking up boxrec, he was utter **** who took the chance because benn and eubank were on the urge of retirement. he btw retired as he had to face calzaghe but he pulled out and eubank was his replacement taking the calzaghe fight on 2 weeks notice.

6. wrong yet again, jones was the pound for pound no1 guy at da time and joe should have chased jones, not da other way around. joe was pretty much a nobody when jones was running things, he could have gone to USA and faced jones there but didnt calzaghe also has admitted to a UK newspaper that jones was the only fighter that would have beaten him. jones moved up after dominating at 168 when no one was left or fighting him so he went for the bigger names/bigger money fights movin up

[abadger]

Pretty much somes it all up

Nice to see someone agree with me. I find it amazing that praising an awesome, undefeated champion like Calzaghe can sometimes be almost a taboo on this board.

[Xplosivo]

You can't just pick and choose which fights to look at when assessing fighters, every supposed 'great' on earth other than Calzaghe and Mayweather has suffered losses that would instantly see Joe derided as exposed. People don't like to admit it but its true. Calzaghe has dominated his division without a single mistake for ten years and is now undefeated at two weights. You can't just look past this, the point of boxing is to win fights, avoid losses, acquire titles and defend them. Joe Calzaghe has a perfect record at this.

I mean, why is it that you need to post threads saying that probably the world's most currently dominant boxer is no good? He clearly is.

dominated against who? 168 had the worst fighters at the time...i know it wasnt calzaghe's fault but he should have moved up years ago

calzaghe is a good fighter lets just leave it to tht. mayweather, cotto, pacquiao, even bitchko are more dominant right now. and this is coming frm the biggest wlad hater but i cant deny he is a dominant hw now.

[abadger]

dominated against who? 168 had the worst fighters at the time...i know it wasnt calzaghe's fault but he should have moved up years ago

calzaghe is a good fighter lets just leave it to tht. mayweather, cotto, pacquiao, even bitchko are more dominant right now. and this is coming frm the biggest wlad hater but i cant deny he is a dominant hw now.

Joe Calzaghe has quite literally exhausted the SMW division and has just taken the title of the Ring LHW champ. The number of fighters who would start as favourite against him is zero. Along with Pacquaio he is currently the most legitimately dominant fighter on earth. His critics are reduced to positing fantasy matchups against prime Roy and Toney, since in reality he has never lost. All of your assertions that he is not great are based on subjective judgements about his quality of opposition, whereas all arguments that he is are based on the hard facts of his professional record.

Who should Joe have fought to be considered great? He just beat Hopkins, so are we saying that Joe has to beat a prime Jones to be considered a great? Someone else? Jones is probably the most talented fighter of the last ten years, and losses to him don't appear to affect Hopkins and Toney's status. It's a double standard.

[majestiC]

1. so kessler beat a guy that sven ottke KO'd but he is the 2nd greatest in the past 10 years? what is his biggest win and what did you put him as the 2nd best based on? coz he hasnt achieved it yet


2. thats why hopkins is a great fighter, even being a shade of his former self he was able to beat elite fighters and give calzaghe a close fight at the age of 43, prime hopkins would win no doubt.

3. dumb yanks picked lacy to win, open the predictions page from boxingscene writers, it was 60-40 in favour of lacy, the sensible ones picked calzaghe, tell me even if he was a hype job who did he beat? because he didnt beat sheikha imo just a body builder who was slow as hell. i picked calzaghe by tko in 5 rounds after watching atleast 3 fights of calzaghe and lacy.

4. i will upload the fight for you, there is no way calzaghe deserved the W in that fight, it was reid's fight and a gift for joe.

5. losing to steve collins is end of story. eubank was pretty much done after 1993 and he fought calzaghe i think in 1997 after losing to a horrible fighter in steve collins, who people praise by looking up boxrec, he was utter **** who took the chance because benn and eubank were on the urge of retirement. he btw retired as he had to face calzaghe but he pulled out and eubank was his replacement taking the calzaghe fight on 2 weeks notice.

6. wrong yet again, jones was the pound for pound no1 guy at da time and joe should have chased jones, not da other way around. joe was pretty much a nobody when jones was running things, he could have gone to USA and faced jones there but didnt calzaghe also has admitted to a UK newspaper that jones was the only fighter that would have beaten him. jones moved up after dominating at 168 when no one was left or fighting him so he went for the bigger names/bigger money fights movin up

Are you honestly saying Ottke is better than Kessler?

[Xplosivo]

Joe Calzaghe has quite literally exhausted the SMW division and has just taken the title of the Ring LHW champ. The number of fighters who would start as favourite against him is zero. Along with Pacquaio he is currently the most legitimately dominant fighter on earth. His critics are reduced to positing fantasy matchups against prime Roy and Toney, since in reality he has never lost. All of your assertions that he is not great are based on subjective judgements about his quality of opposition, whereas all arguments that he is are based on the hard facts of his professional record.

Who should Joe have fought to be considered great? He just beat Hopkins, so are we saying that Joe has to beat a prime Jones to be considered a great? Someone else? Jones is probably the most talented fighter of the last ten years, and losses to him don't appear to affect Hopkins and Toney's status. It's a double standard.

because hopkins and toney came back after those losses and beat good fighters while calzaghe was busy in wales fighting the byron mitchels, evan ashiras, tocker pudwills of this world.

[Xplosivo]

Are you honestly saying Ottke is better than Kessler?

are you saying kessler has achieved more in his career than ottke? i base it on achievements not skills. obviously kessler is more talented but he hasnt done **** yet. his biggest wins are against mundine and a guy who will lose to lucian bute pretty soon. harsh facts buddy