Is Calzaghe a Top 25 Fighter in the last 30 Years?

[Clegg]

You do realise how ignorant and ****** you look putting Calzaghe over Foreman....Foreman is rated as the top five heavyweights in the all time list, and HEAVYWEIGHT...not same crappy division that was made a few decades ago...ofcourse sheikha, manfredo and pudwill are better than frazier, norton and moorer :rolleyes

You are the moron who put 'in the last 30 years' in your thread title and then tries to include a win Foreman had in the early 70s. Maybe you should include Ali in your list, as he fought in the last 30 years, even though he didn't achieve as much as JC during that time period. Or maybe you should just get back on your ****** bus and ride out of this thread before you embarrass yourself any further.

[Xplosivo]

You are the moron who put 'in the last 30 years' in your thread title and then tries to include a win Foreman had in the early 70s. Maybe you should include Ali in your list, as he fought in the last 30 years, even though he didn't achieve as much as JC during that time period. Or maybe you should just get back on your ****** bus and ride out of this thread before you embarrass yourself any further.

I asked if calzaghe is a top 25 fighter since 1978...your another calzaghe nuthugger who cant see the world clear without joe's balls covering your spectacles.

Question for you: Has calzaghe has anything that makes him better than the guy who became the ,LINEAR heavyweight champion at the age of 45 beating an undefeated michael moorer? Answer that and embarrass yourself

LOL @ Calzaghe being better than Foreman....wait just saw your from the UK

[Clegg]

I asked if calzaghe is a top 25 fighter since 1978...your another calzaghe nuthugger who cant see the world clear without joe's balls covering your spectacles.:

You're unable to discuss thing sensibly or rationally. All you do is post ****** comment after ****** comment, most of them about Calzaghe. If someone disagrees you either ignore them or call them a nuthugger.

Here's what I said earlier in the thread:

"I would say that I'm not sure if I'd have Calzaghe in the top 25, but I would have him above some of the people on your list."

If you think that rating Calzaghe above Castillo is nuthuggery then you are wrong, it's as simple as that. If a Mexican poster wants to claim that Castillo was better I'd read his views and while I may disagree I wouldn't accuse him of being a nuthugger unless he went OTT and started claiming that Castillo is top 5 or something like that.

My general view on Calzaghe:

Joe is a very good fighter and the fact that most people view him as top 5 p4p reflects this. Having said that, it's wrong that some people rate him so highly in terms of ATG status. He performed badly against Hopkins and against several average fighters and that cannot be overlooked.

Aaron Pryor was a great fighter and may've beaten Ray Leonard. But like Calzaghe vs Jones the fight didn't happen and Leonard went on to achieve great things in other weight classes(as did Jones). Arguello was a better fighter than Kessler or old Hopkins, too.

Calzaghe suffered from not being in a talent-loaded division, but even so you have to judge him, Pryor and everyone else based upon what they do, not based upon what they could've done if things had been different.

Leonard, Hearns and Duran>Pryor
Jones and Hopkins>Calzaghe

My post on the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight:

As for Joe, it was even worse. He had something to prove and he didn't do it. Having an undefeated record is something to be proud of, but it doesn't necessarily put you up there with Marciano. Sven Ottke could tell you that. Every great fighter needs a great victory, and this just wasn't enough.

Let's look at the first round from a Calzaghe stand point: All the way through the build-up to this fight there have been people saying that Hopkins had a chance if he could time his counter right correctly. Essentially that was the only punch Calzaghe had to look out for. If people on here were saying that Calzaghe has to be careful about not rushing in and getting caught, then surely he was told the same thing by the people preparing him for the fight. Even if he wasn't, he should've known it himself.

So what does Calzaghe do? The fight had barely started and he walks onto a big right hand. Fighters get tired sometimes. If it had happened in the 12th round then it would be bad but understandable. But that was the worst possible thing to do in a fight where you need to impress.

Round 2-12: Ineffectual offense. Calzaghe took several rounds to get going and once he did so he still didn't land anything meaningful.

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=177133

I don't expect you to have read all of my posts before responding to me, but if you're going to accuse someone of being a nuthugger you should at least do your research. But hey, you've never bothered researching anything before, why break the habit of a lifetime, right?

Question for you: Has calzaghe has anything that makes him better than the guy who became the ,LINEAR heavyweight champion at the age of 45 beating an undefeated michael moorer? Answer that and embarrass yourself

Age is irrelevant. Either Foreman did better or Calzaghe did, but if you think Calzaghe did better, you can't give Foreman the edge just because of age. Ali would've beaten Berbick in his prime, but no one would say "Ali's achieved more in the past 30 years because he was in such a bad way for the Berbick fight" so you can't do the same for Foreman.

Michael Moorer's undefeated record was in large part due to the fact that he had fought at light heavyweight. He won one world heavyweight title fight in his entire career, by majority decision, and lost the rematch of that fight by KO.

Foreman was overweight and slow, and he fought mostly journeymen after coming back. He lost to Holyfield and Tommy Morrisson before getting a shot at Moorer, who was looking for an easy defence and figured that a fat old man who hadn't fought for a while and was coming off a loss would be a good choice of opponent. He was winning on points until his glass jaw let him down. Foreman followed this up by winning two heavily disputed decisions against average fighters and then losing to Shannon Briggs.

At no point in the past 30 years was Foreman the best heavyweight in the world.

LOL @ Calzaghe being better than Foreman....wait just saw your from the UK

lolpwnpwnlmao!!!!1111

By the way, you still didn't explain why you included Foreman's win over Frazier in a discussion about events within the past 30 years?

[Xplosivo]

Joe's career is a joke...he padded his record and fought past their prime fighters...had like 3 mandatory fights and defended his Warren Boxing Organisation title against nobodies...cherry picking at the finest, best win is against kessler, whos best win is against a guy who got ktfo by sven ottke, the lightest puncher of all time at 168....

Reid clearly beat him and a 44 year old Hopkins beat him....

[Xplosivo]

You're unable to discuss thing sensibly or rationally. All you do is post ****** comment after ****** comment, most of them about Calzaghe. If someone disagrees you either ignore them or call them a nuthugger.

Here's what I said earlier in the thread:

"I would say that I'm not sure if I'd have Calzaghe in the top 25, but I would have him above some of the people on your list."

If you think that rating Calzaghe above Castillo is nuthuggery then you are wrong, it's as simple as that. If a Mexican poster wants to claim that Castillo was better I'd read his views and while I may disagree I wouldn't accuse him of being a nuthugger unless he went OTT and started claiming that Castillo is top 5 or something like that.

My general view on Calzaghe:



My post on the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight:


http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=177133

I don't expect you to have read all of my posts before responding to me, but if you're going to accuse someone of being a nuthugger you should at least do your research. But hey, you've never bothered researching anything before, why break the habit of a lifetime, right?



Age is irrelevant. Either Foreman did better or Calzaghe did, but if you think Calzaghe did better, you can't give Foreman the edge just because of age. Ali would've beaten Berbick in his prime, but no one would say "Ali's achieved more in the past 30 years because he was in such a bad way for the Berbick fight" so you can't do the same for Foreman.

Michael Moorer's undefeated record was in large part due to the fact that he had fought at light heavyweight. He won one world heavyweight title fight in his entire career, by majority decision, and lost the rematch of that fight by KO.

Foreman was overweight and slow, and he fought mostly journeymen after coming back. He lost to Holyfield and Tommy Morrisson before getting a shot at Moorer, who was looking for an easy defence and figured that a fat old man who hadn't fought for a while and was coming off a loss would be a good choice of opponent. He was winning on points until his glass jaw let him down. Foreman followed this up by winning two heavily disputed decisions against average fighters and then losing to Shannon Briggs.

At no point in the past 30 years was Foreman the best heavyweight in the world.



lolpwnpwnlmao!!!!1111

By the way, you still didn't explain why you included Foreman's win over Frazier in a discussion about events within the past 30 years?

So does Calzaghe have better wins than Castillo? Castillo has wins over Corrales, Casamayor, diaz, prime lazcano and stevie johnston, arguably beat Floyd mayweather.

your making self look like a ****ing idiot if you say calzaghe has a better resume/wins than castillo when all calzaghe has done is get gifts over a 44 year old past his best hopkins and a win against kessler who hasnt **** yet. go and make a thread and see how many people agree with you on who has a better resume...you dont even probably know much about boxing since your a brit...

dont boxrec your way through idiot, either watch the foreman vs briggs fight or dont comment on it at all, a 46 year old foreman beat briggs but was robbed, again ask anyone who has actually seen the fight and they will tell you no way briggs won.

[B]At no point in the past 30 years was Foreman the best heavyweight in the world.[/B]

LOL u shot your self on the foot on that one...Moorer was the LINEAR, RING MAGAZINE, Unified...THE HW Champion by beating a Prime Holyfield...and Foreman beat Moorer.

[bsrizpac]

So does Calzaghe have better wins than Castillo? Castillo has wins over Corrales, Casamayor, diaz, prime lazcano and stevie johnston, arguably beat Floyd mayweather.

your making self look like a ****ing idiot if you say calzaghe has a better resume/wins than castillo when all calzaghe has done is get gifts over a 44 year old past his best hopkins and a win against kessler who hasnt **** yet. go and make a thread and see how many people agree with you on who has a better resume...you dont even probably know much about boxing since your a brit...

dont boxrec your way through idiot, either watch the foreman vs briggs fight or dont comment on it at all, a 46 year old foreman beat briggs but was robbed, again ask anyone who has actually seen the fight and they will tell you no way briggs won.

[B]At no point in the past 30 years was Foreman the best heavyweight in the world.[/B]

LOL u shot your self on the foot on that one...Moorer was the LINEAR, RING MAGAZINE, Unified...THE HW Champion by beating a Prime Holyfield...and Foreman beat Moorer.

BUT HE BEAT KESSLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[abadger]

Joe's career is a joke...he padded his record and fought past their prime fighters...had like 3 mandatory fights and defended his Warren Boxing Organisation title against nobodies...cherry picking at the finest, best win is against kessler, whos best win is against a guy who got ktfo by sven ottke, the lightest puncher of all time at 168....

Reid clearly beat him and a 44 year old Hopkins beat him....

The second you said "Joe's career is a joke" you betrayed two things 1) that you know little or nothing about boxing and 2) that you are actually setting out to stir up ****. In my opinion you do the second in order to cover up the first.

I am increasingly asking myself what it is that motivates you and the legions of posters like you to have this crazy desire to disparage fighters basically that are not from the United States. Do you actually like boxing, or is your sole motivation to somehow boost your ego by criticising anything which you yourself do not like. Simply put, what on earth do you get out of being so negative?

[Xplosivo]

i see a lot of brits voting here....

[Vasyl’s dad]

calzaghe's biggest win is against a 44 year old hopkins who he barely got past...now tell me who is hopkin's biggest win? the outsized trinidad...im sorry but im not sure if your convincing us or yourself that calzaghe has done more in boxing than winky

Can you tell me the last time Wright held 2 Ring world championships at the same time?

[Xplosivo]

Can you tell me the last time Wright held 2 Ring world championships at the same time?

so is calzaghe's resume better than winky's?