Joe Cazaghe's resume: very impressive

[IMDAZED]

Ok, lets break this down.

Come on, Calzaghe's resume is derided as being full of bums on a regular basis, maybe not by you, but by plenty of other posters.

Let's stick to me.

The point that Tunney is trying to make by posting the thread is simply that quite a lot of these supposed "bums" were good enough to win world titles of their own and were therefore perfectly solid mid-level opposition for Calzaghe.

False. Winning a BS title doesn't make you anything. it's about WHO you beat. Or do you not agree? Apparently not, which explains why I'm reading how Joe Calzaghe's record is so great because he beat MARIO VEIT, among others.

No-one, and I repeat no-one is trying to say that any of these wins alone makes Joe "great", and you are painting a picture of Calzaghe fans that suits your own hyperbolic, hyper-critical posting style when you claim that they do.

Umm...what does this have to do with anything? The bottom line is, the threadstarter listed reasons why Calzaghe's resume is IMPRESSIVE. Suffice to say, half of the names listed are UNIMPRESSIVE.

Likewise, you keep mentioning all time great, for the sole reason that in saying this you feel that you are on solid ground. I'm sure some people have posted that Joe is #1 ATG, but you're not arguing with them right now, you're arguing with me, and I don't share that opinion, in fact I agree almost perfectly with your assesment of Calzaghe as a good boxer and surefire HOFer. As for top 25 of last thirty years, who knows, I'm sure you'd agree that the question is at least debatable.

Great! Glad to know you aren't a blind nuthugger.

So please, don't assume that every Calzaghe fan is some sort of crazy nuthugger and that everything ever posted about him is intended to hype him up to high heaven. It isn't. In an environment where his entire career and record is derided on a regular basis, most posts about him are designed only to defend him from this kind of ludicrous criticism, and point out that in fact, he is one of the best boxers active today, an opinion which I know that you share.

His entire career is derided because he spent much of it beating Ottke leftovers while calling out the greats of his time to come fight him in Wales. That's why it's derided. It's derided because Jeff Lacy and Mikkel Kessler had to fight him on his terms but he couldn't be bothered to do the same back when Hopkins and Jones were actually threats. It's derided because people on here claim he actuallly could beat these guys back then when we just saw him go tit for tat with a 43yr old version.

Unfortunately, I'm not your typical American. Calzaghe is a fine fighter. But the nuthugging, unfortunately, must stop. The comparison to the true greats of his time, must stop. And if Calzaghe really wanted the deriding to stop, he would've fought some of these greats WHEN THEY WERE GREAT.

[RichCCFC]

I was just looking on boxrec (lol) comparing Joe's resume to Roy Jones Jr and Bernard Hopkins'.

Roy Jones fought better competition more often than Joe and has one or two more notable names in his big wins catergory. Bernard on the other hand, has not got a better resume than Joe at all. They are even if you ask me, I can't seperate them. Bernard has fought better opposition but he has lost 5 times...

[IMDAZED]

I follow the heavyweight division very closely, but there's no one with a record of 42-0 who fought a couple of weeks ago in the Bronx. In fact there's no one with a 42-0 record at all! You made that up.

Everything I stated about Joe in the opening post is accurate, I didn't need to make anything up. I did not say Joe's resume is impressive not because of any single win, although there's several very good one's like Kessler and the complete domination of Lacy.

It's impressive because of the summation of all those wins.

I do this for a living, ok? So go back and do all the research you want and I'm sure you'll find the fighter. In fact, he was Polish or something...and TERRIBLE.

Finally, what you said being accurate doesn't make it IMPRESSIVE. Beating some 12-0 bum named Delaney ISN'T IMPRESSIVE. Neither is beating Mario Veit twice, or a whole bunch of other crap you threw in there to try and hype up his record. It's a solid record, it doesn't need bull****. And it is what it is. Good, not great.

[IMDAZED]

I was just looking on boxrec (lol) comparing Joe's resume to Roy Jones Jr and Bernard Hopkins'.

Roy Jones fought better competition more often than Joe and has one or two more notable names in his big wins catergory. Bernard on the other hand, has not got a better resume than Joe at all. They are even if you ask me, I can't seperate them. Bernard has fought better opposition but he has lost 5 times...

You can't even compare Calzaghe's record with Jones so we agree there.

But the day Calzaghe leaps two divisions and fights the MAN there like Hopkins did, call me. ****, Calzaghe doesn't even have a win as good as Hopkins' victory over Glen Johnson. Actually, Calzaghe won't even fight Glen Johnson now hahahahaha.

[Live Dog]

I was just looking on boxrec (lol) comparing Joe's resume to Roy Jones Jr and Bernard Hopkins'.

Roy Jones fought better competition more often than Joe and has one or two more notable names in his big wins catergory. Bernard on the other hand, has not got a better resume than Joe at all. They are even if you ask me, I can't seperate them. Bernard has fought better opposition but he has lost 5 times...

Hopkins resume is greater than that of Joe's.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

I've been a fan for over 25 years now and I haven't read any boxing handbook or rulebook that says that a fighter that isn't american must fight in america to be great. american fighters, rarely, if ever, defend their "world" championship outside of their home country.

Those are the facts.

Now, my question to you is, do you want the fighters to come to america because there is more money or because the competition is better?

The money is here and the competition fights here cause of HBO Showtime and companys like Top rank Don King etc Look at the p4p list were do most of them fight in America they dont have to be american but most of them fight here.

[1g5a22]

2 words in regards to hopkins......

howard eastman...

you cant fight a top dog everytime,get over it,calzaghe has over 20defenses, go on joe lad!!!!!!!!!!!


wait for it.............................................

[RichCCFC]

You can't even compare Calzaghe's record with Jones so we agree there.

But the day Calzaghe leaps two divisions and fights the MAN there like Hopkins did, call me. ****, Calzaghe doesn't even have a win as good as Hopkins' victory over Glen Johnson. Actually, Calzaghe won't even fight Glen Johnson now hahahahaha.

Don't make out like Hopkins was a puny Middleweight because Hopkins infact started out as a Light Heavyweight, it's hardly an incredible feat is it?

Glen Johnson at the time was a journeyman, don't be blinded by his undefeated record, that win is no where near as good as it is made out.

[RichCCFC]

Hopkins resume is greater than that of Joe's.

I disagree there but I respect your opinion.

[The Hammer]

I do this for a living, ok? So go back and do all the research you want and I'm sure you'll find the fighter. In fact, he was Polish or something...and TERRIBLE.

Finally, what you said being accurate doesn't make it IMPRESSIVE. Beating some 12-0 bum named Delaney ISN'T IMPRESSIVE. Neither is beating Mario Veit twice, or a whole bunch of other crap you threw in there to try and hype up his record. It's a solid record, it doesn't need bull****. And it is what it is. Good, not great.

You've been exposed. Not only was there no heavyweight with a record of 42-0 who fought in the Bronx two weeks ago, there is no active heavyweight with a record of 42-0.

You didn't seem to understand what I said about Calzaghe's resume - do you have a reading disability? I said Calzaghe's resume is impressive because of the summation of all those details I mentioned, not because of any single win.