5Burowz vs. MajesticC for Joe Cal supremacy

[majestiC]

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

Ottke didnt do **** his best wins were corrupt gifts

[abadger]

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.

Mitchell was good fighter as were: Robin Reid, Sakio Bika, Richie Woodhall, Omar Sheika, Mario Veit, Charles Brewer and probably some of the other names Calzaghe has but neither of us know much about. The fighter listed here are world champs at best and credible world contenders at worst, just because you haven't heard of them doesn't make it not so. Just like the fact that I haven't heard of most of the names on Hopkins resume doesn't make all of them 'bums'.

[5burowz]

5Burowz,

As I pointed out in your previous thread, your entire contention that Joe Calzaghe is based on one idea alone, that Joe Calzaghe has never fought any quality opposition. You, and all Calzaghe haters cling to this erroneous notion so firmly that you blindly ignore the very real achievements that Calzaghe has made in his career, and make yourselves look ****** by claiming that the world's longest reigning champion, longest active undefeated fighter and current Ring 2 weight champ is not a great of boxing. It is absurd, of course he is.

When discussing greatness we are referring to the achievements of a fighter relative to his peers as well as historically, so to see if Calzaghe is great lets take each of your sole contention, that to be great a fighter has to beat great prime opponents and compare Calzaghe to his immediate competitors for greatness, who I believe are Bernard Hopkins, Roy Jones and James Toney.

Bernard Hopkins:

Bernard Hopkins has LOST every time he has ever faced an elite level primeish opponent. These Roy Jones, Jermain Taylor and Joe Calzaghe, with Jermain not even being a true elite. The wins he gets most credit for are Winky, Tarver and Trinidad, but in reality both Winky and Tarver were way over the hill and Trinidad was not a middleweight. In reality, Hopkins best genuine wins are over the likes of Glen Johnson, William Joppy and Howard Eastman, none of whom are exactly elite guys. These kind of names hardly blow names like Reid, Veit, Brewer and Mitchell out of the water, they are at a similar level.

Roy Jones:

Roy Jones record is so inflated it is crazy. He has two wins over genuine prime elites, in Hopkins and Toney. He is the best of the trio I am discussing, but his major achievement is his multi weight wins, he has rarely taken on and fought the best at a weight, let alone cleared out a division. After Hopkins and Toney his best wins are Mike McCallum, Montel Griffin, Tarver, Clinton Woods and Johhn Ruiz. None of these are worldbeating names and range from talented almost elites to journeymen. I must add, and we must not forget, that Jones the great has losses to Griffin, Tarver and Johnson, all of whom a prime Calzaghe would have beaten, so how is it that he retains so much credit? His resume may be a bit better based on wins, but is much worse on losses, so I so no reason why Jones should be great but not Calzaghe.

James Toney

I have a lot of time for James Toney, his extraordinary activity and longevity win him a lot of respect in my eyes, but the truth is that his standard of opposition is not outstandingly amazing. His best wins are against Nunn and Barkley, later Jirov with lots of medium level contenders like Littles and old heavyweights like Holyfield. He lost to Jones as well as Griffin and Thadzi. Nunn was a good but not great champ, and Barkley was shot as ****. Jirov was hardly a true great either! Like Jones, Toney has a good resume, but again it is not brimming with amazing fighters, just plenty of good ones exactly like Calzaghe's and Hopkins.

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.

I would also like to point out that Calzaghe has now reached the point in his career when each of the other three started losing. Each of them began going up in weight once they lost, and then won some lost some above their original weight. Calzaghe by contrast has moved up having exhausted the SMW division specifically to pursue fights with the 'greats' who are supposed to beat him, Hopkins and Jones. You can claim that they are old, but for me facing those two is better than taking on Tarver and old Winky, let alone John Ruiz.

Denying Calzaghe his great status means we actually have to ignore the fact that he has done what his peers could not at their original weights and is now doing what earned each of them so much credit, namely moving up to a new weight and winning.

For me all these fighters are great, calzaghe included.

I was actually hoping you would answer or try to debate some of the things I stated in my original post, but whatever. If Winky and Tarver were OLD for Hopkins, than so was Eubank, Reid, Woodhall, and Mitchell for Calzaghe. You can't have it both ways. And, I sorta disagree about Glen Johnson not being right up there amongst the best fighters we're talking about. Would Joe Cal ever face Glen? I sincerely doubt it. Brushing off Glen as some kind of journeymen is foolish talk. Ask Chad Dawson if he thinks Glen is an average fighter.

I really don't know what to say about your RJJ statements. When was the last time Calzaghe fought at heavyweight? There simply is no comparison to what RJJ has done throughout his career compared to Calzaghe, and I'm FAR from a RJJ fan. I hated him ever since he beat Toney And, did you just call Mike McCallum "almost elite???" The man was a great fighter, plain and simple. And, you claim that Joe C would've beaten Tarver, Griffin, and Johson, yet he DIDN'T. That is the point, he never took himself out of his comfort zone until the Kessler fight.


Same kind of sentiments about Toney too. The man took himself out of his comfort zone and fought at weight classes that he struggled to make weight at-and he won. Joe DOES NOT have better wins on his resume than does Toney. It's not even close. Could Joe C beat ANY version of Holyfield? No. Could he compete with the types of heavies James did? Never. Sam Peter would KO Joe within 3 rounds. The fact that Toney was able to win at different weight classes proves just how good he is.


And, Calzaghe DID NOT exhaust the SM division, that is the whole point of my OP really. You claim he did, but the proof that he didn't is there. It's all there laid out for you nicely as to how he did not accomplish what you say he did. He did not challenge Liles for his WBA belt, he did not challenge a prime RJJ for his IBF belt, and he never tried to capture the WBC 'til Kessler.


Also, how is Calzaghe taking on RJJ and B-Hop NOW, somehow better than fighting Tarver, Winky, and Ruiz?


Lastly, I completely disagree with this statement of yours:

"he has done what his peers could not at their original weights and is now doing what earned each of them so much credit, namely moving up to a new weight and winning."


Both Jones and Toney won at multiple weights which is something Joe can't say except for the Hop fight. When Jones and Toney were doing it, they weren't fighting 43-year-old fighters by and large, now were they? Sam Peter is in his prime, and IMO, Toney beat him in their first fight...but that's beside the point. Basically, by your above statement, you're harping on Jones and Toney for not defending whatever title(s) they had a particular weight class as many times as Joe did, which is absurd. What Jones and Toney have accomplished far exceeds what Joe has done in his career. You say all those title defenses Calzaghe has is some great accomplishment yet where is the challenge of fighting in your own backyard to fighters who aren't even the best in that particular weight class?


I think that's it Badger, I'm kinda tired. LOL I might come back to this later tonight, but I definitely will revisit tomorrow. Enjoy tonight's fights if you're watching. Nice having this discourse with ya, Peace.

[abadger]

I think that's it Badger, I'm kinda tired. LOL I might come back to this later tonight, but I definitely will revisit tomorrow. Enjoy tonight's fights if you're watching. Nice having this discourse with ya, Peace.

Cool. I can get back into this tomorrow too, but lets leave it for tonight. I have to get drunk.

[5burowz]

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.

And, I could say that the reason Calzaghe doesn't have any losses is because he has never really challenged himself like RJJ and Toney. I also still haven't gotten any response to my original sentiments. Why that is I'm not sure. I've tried to address all the things you said but you've yet to tell me why Joe never challenged for other titles until just recently. Joe, IMO, has had a very convenient career. It was tailor made to go undefeated. Also, I NEVER said Calzaghe was "No Good" as you pointed out above. I said he wasn't an all-time great. He is a very good fighter who never challenged himself in his prime IMO. He left a lot on the table unfortunately.

[5burowz]

Cool. I can get back into this tomorrow too, but lets leave it for tonight. I have to get drunk.

haha, yeah, I could use a drink too. My eyes hurt from staring at the computer all day. Enjoy your libations mate.

[5burowz]

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

If that statement is true, it further proves that Cal was just trying to pad his record so-to-speak. By not fighting the best fighters out there, he lessened the risk of him losing. But, that's not what boxing is about. It's about going out and facing the best in the division you're in. Cal spent almost his entire career at SM yet doesn't have a whole lot to show for it IMO in terms of beating other great fighters at that weight. The bottom line is, Joe should've fought Jones, Liles, and whoever else that was considered top-10 comp during his reign at SM.

[RichCCFC]

Which prime fighter did Hopkins beat?