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

[Kris Silver]

What? your putting words in my mouth now.

first of all, i said i based my list on ACHEIVMENTS, not P4P status,

secondly i told you the list was just my opinion, and i know there could be a couple of fighters i dont know much about on the list.

at the end f the day , what im trying to say is that calzaghe aint top 25 material, you could say some of the people i rated higher than him shouldnt be there, but thats your opinion.

Your not actually digesting, let alone responding to what's being said to you, which are valid points.

Your not providing any info to back your opinion up, you say you may not know much about some of those fighters, what's may? You either do or you don't. The fact you don't even know this shows your just going on a hunch, on all of it.

[hishaam15]

Ok, once more: yes, I understand that your opinion is that he is not top 25. What I am doing is trying to get you to explain why. Are you able to grasp this concept?

Tell me what the achievements of Tsyzu are, then we can see why they are better than Calzaghe's.

If you want, just say "it's my opinion, but don't know how to justify it" and we'll leave it at that. If not, then for God's sake explain what you considered when making your list. And don't just say "achievements". Say what the achievements actually were and what makes them better than Calzaghe's.

Tszyu:
- undisputed LWW champ
- great KO of Judah
- much more of a solid resume than Joe

now can you explain why you would rate Joe higher? you keep critising my list when i say its not perfect, yet you do not make your own...

[hishaam15]

Your not actually digesting, let alone responding to what's being said to you, which are valid points.

Your not providing any info to back your opinion up, you say you may not know much about some of those fighters, what's may? You either do or you don't. The fact you don't even know this shows your just going on a hunch, on all of it.

What? im just saying that im not perfect, and dont know EVERYTHING about EVRY fighter on the list, do you?

[Kris Silver]

What? im just saying that im not perfect, and dont know EVERYTHING about EVRY fighter on the list, do you?

No, and I'm happy to admit I don't know enough to vote.

If you really don't know, abstain.

[hishaam15]

No, and I'm happy to admit I don't know enough to vote.

If you really don't know, abstain.

Fair enough.
i voted because IMO calzaghe aint top 25.

[Kris Silver]

Fair enough.
i voted because IMO calzaghe aint top 25.

Words cannot describe. You admitted you may not know much about some of those fighters. Therefore you can't back up or justify your opinion, so it's not credible.

If your in a court of law you don't vote guilty and justify it as, well I don't know why or much about it, I just reckon.

Now I'm not saying this is anywhere near as serious of course. But the point is, if you don't know your not equipped vote and judge.

With all due respect I'd read back some of the comments of the previous pages because it's quite worrying.

[hishaam15]

Words cannot describe. You admitted you may not know much about some of those fighters. Therefore you can't back up or justify your opinion, so it's not credible.

If your in a court of law you don't vote guilty and justify it as, well I don't know why or much about it, I just reckon.

Now I'm not saying this is anywhere near as serious of course. But the point is, if you don't know your not equipped vote and judge.

With all due respect I'd read back some of the comments of the previous pages because it's quite worrying.

i said in previous comments i did not know much about a COUPLE of fighters on the list. however the topic was on calzaghe and his legacy, which i know plenty about.

[Clegg]

i didnt that if you win as the underdog its a good acheivment. calzaghe pulled out as the underdog against who Lacy? he could have taken much bigger challenges before that, one of the reasons he doesnt get an ATG standing. beating someone when everyone is expecting you to lose is a way you can assess someones acheivements, if Calzaghe was expected to beat Lacy would he get the amount of flack he does for that win now?

Ok, not sure how much of the above makes sense. Calzaghe doesn't get flack for beating Lacy, it's just that it's debatable how much credit he deserves, and whether or not Calzaghe was an underdog is completely irrelevant. It means nothing, absolutely nothing at all.

Douglas was 42-1 to beat Tyson. Does winning that fight make him better than Mayweather, who was always the favourite? No.

As for Calzaghe taking on bigger challenges, what about Foreman? He was stripped of two different titles because of not facing people. How about Tszyu, who never gave Phillips a rematch? If Calzaghe loses points for not facing Jones, do Tszyu and Mayweather lose points for not facing each other? Does Tszyu lose marks for not facing the best at 175?

IMO what Foreman acheived in the last 30 years is far greater than what Calzaghe has acheived.

Why? This is getting tedious

you want me to explain why calzaghe doest receive an ATG 25 standing?

No. I want you to explain why you rate him above Tszyu and the others.

i thought this would be obvious, but here goes:

- Competition wasnt good

Yes it was. Maybe not great, but again...you aren't explaining why. In order to actually explain here, you're going to have to say why Calzaghe's opposition was worse than Tszyu's and why his wins are not as good as Castillo's.

- Could have taken better challenges

Not at 168. So he would've had to move up to 175. But Tszyu never went to 147, so isn't the criticism true of him as well?

- arguably lost to a 43 year old Hop and Reid

No. No such thing as arguably lost. The result of a fight is a matter of fact. You can say that you scored it for them, but achievements is based upon fact. Now, if you want, you can talk about fights that were clear robberies and take that into account. The problem here though is that most people had Calzaghe winning both fights.

I can sit here and say that several people on your list "arguably lost" too, you realise that, right?

- Defended WBO belt entirely in europe for 8 years before unifying.

Another criticism, when what I have spent countless posts asking for is a comparison of achievements.

I am asking you to compare the positive parts of each resume, which is what you do when deciding what boxer has the better achievements. What you are offering is a negative critique of one guy's resume.

Do you understand the difference?

- Only stuck at SMW whole career (except Hop)

Whereas Tszyu, on the other hand...oh wait.

Yeah, that's right, Calzaghe cleaned out one division and beat the best guy in a 2nd division. Tsyzu beat most of the best guys, but didn't fight Mayweather, lost to Vince Phillips, and lost to Hatton once he was past his best. He also didn't attempt to move up in weight. And it's JC who looks bad in that comparison?

- Has very obvious Flaws that a young, fresh and talented fighter could easily expose

Though this point is ******, let's try and stick to the discussion, eh? This has what to do with achievements exactly? And better fighters than Vince Phillips were unable to "expose" Calzaghe so again...

[NoFear24]

Man this is terrible. I can't really decide right now because my head is aching like crazy, but from what I can tell. Joe resume is pretty ****ty. When your fighting nobodies most of your career and not even willing to fight in the US to prove your the best even in your prime proves to me that he knew he would get beat by some of the best in his era.

This is why I don't respect Joe as much, he was afraid to come to the US and prove he was the best against the top fighters in the world in his prime. You got guys like Lennox Lewis, Ricky Hatton, willing to test US soil to prove there the best in there the best in there division while still in there primes against great fighters in there era, but you got Joe here just hiding out in the UK most of his entire career fighting nobodys who haven't achieved anything in there career and only choosing to fight in the US against former legends that where once great in the prime.

Joes been beating up on bums his entire career and now he thinks by adding some very old legends to his resume at the end of his career will help him. It won't, everyone knows Joe never really want to fight a great fighter in his prime. Hell the only great fighter he ever fought was 40+ years old and arguably he lost that fight. Joe admitted he was pitty patty punching was just pathetic. They didn't any damage to BHop and Bhop damage him with much more cleaner and crisper punches. I guess Joe strategy worked for him by swinging as fast as he could slapping away to trick the judges into thinking he was actually doing damage and connecting.

Either way, he could arguably be top 25 in the last 30 years but his resume is pretty ****ty to me. One of the worst resumes Ive seen by someone who is supposed to be great fighter. To me he is not great, he is just a good fighter who knew who to fight and when to fight them.

[hishaam15]

Ok, not sure how much of the above makes sense. Calzaghe doesn't get flack for beating Lacy, it's just that it's debatable how much credit he deserves, and whether or not Calzaghe was an underdog is completely irrelevant. It means nothing, absolutely nothing at all.

Douglas was 42-1 to beat Tyson. Does winning that fight make him better than Mayweather, who was always the favourite? No.

As for Calzaghe taking on bigger challenges, what about Foreman? He was stripped of two different titles because of not facing people. How about Tszyu, who never gave Phillips a rematch? If Calzaghe loses points for not facing Jones, do Tszyu and Mayweather lose points for not facing each other? Does Tszyu lose marks for not facing the best at 175?



Why? This is getting tedious



No. I want you to explain why you rate him above Tszyu and the others.



Yes it was. Maybe not great, but again...you aren't explaining why. In order to actually explain here, you're going to have to say why Calzaghe's opposition was worse than Tszyu's and why his wins are not as good as Castillo's.



Not at 168. So he would've had to move up to 175. But Tszyu never went to 147, so isn't the criticism true of him as well?



No. No such thing as arguably lost. The result of a fight is a matter of fact. You can say that you scored it for them, but achievements is based upon fact. Now, if you want, you can talk about fights that were clear robberies and take that into account. The problem here though is that most people had Calzaghe winning both fights.

I can sit here and say that several people on your list "arguably lost" too, you realise that, right?



Another criticism, when what I have spent countless posts asking for is a comparison of achievements.

I am asking you to compare the positive parts of each resume, which is what you do when deciding what boxer has the better achievements. What you are offering is a negative critique of one guy's resume.

Do you understand the difference?



Whereas Tszyu, on the other hand...oh wait.

Yeah, that's right, Calzaghe cleaned out one division and beat the best guy in a 2nd division. Tsyzu beat most of the best guys, but didn't fight Mayweather, lost to Vince Phillips, and lost to Hatton once he was past his best. He also didn't attempt to move up in weight. And it's JC who looks bad in that comparison?



Though this point is ******, let's try and stick to the discussion, eh? This has what to do with achievements exactly? And better fighters than Vince Phillips were unable to "expose" Calzaghe so again...

why are you turning this into an argument over my opinion of tszyu acheiving more than calzaghe?

kind of off topic, isnt it?