Calzaghe Haters: What Is It You Don't Like?

[CICATRICES]

Roy's left hook to the body will cause Calzaghe lots of problems.
Like Woods, Calzaghe's torso is too long.

[abadger]

Go post some more racist bull**** about how hatton lost cause he's white and Floyd won cause he's "African".

No one cares what you think ****ing troll douchebag.

PS, Abadger has not responded to all my points. Not a big shock.

Bsrizpac, the only points you have made are about how good or bad Ricky and Lucky13 are as posters and one where you said Jones has a better resume than Calzaghe.

The first aren't points at all, and on the second I agree with you. My point is that even though Jones's may be better the difference is not so incredibly great that it merits Calzaghe being slated for his whilst Jones is praised.

[ExecutiveOutlaw]

im not a fan of his but i dont hate him either

as a wright/mayweather fan technique is very important to me and it disgusts me the way he punches or slaps, one because hitting on the inside of your gloves is illegal and he gets points for them and two it looks ugly. floyd has hand problems as well yet you dont see him slapping like that

as far as his resume smw was a ****ty division and he shouldntve stayed there. hopkins fought jones, johnson, tito, taylor - calzaghe fans point to kessler and lacy but they themseleves have never beat any big names. you can accuse jones and hopkins for ducking all you want but the fact is its calzaghes fault for staying in europe the whole time. america was/is the mecca of boxing and any european star is irrelevant to the average fan unless he fights here

and finally i dont see how barely beating a 43 yr hopkins elevates you to #1 or #2 p4p. in that sense i think he is overrated

[bsrizpac]

Bsrizpac, the only points you have made are about how good or bad Ricky and Lucky13 are as posters and one where you said Jones has a better resume than Calzaghe.

The first aren't points at all, and on the second I agree with you. My point is that even though Jones's may be better the difference is not so incredibly great that it merits Calzaghe being slated for his whilst Jones is praised.

I've mad tons of points about Calzaghe, his boxing etc. This has all been done to death. I'm sorry you don't remember them. Instead you'd rather defend a racist and ******.

And since you glossed over Lucky's comments about black people, please never have the gall to assume that anyone hates Calzaghe cause he's white. They are probably (in your words) "just joking"


Also the first two ARE points. Since you didn't read what I wrote. People hate Calzaghe on here because of IDIOTS like them.

[abadger]

im not a fan of his but i dont hate him either

as a wright/mayweather fan technique is very important to me and it disgusts me the way he punches or slaps, one because hitting on the inside of your gloves is illegal and he gets points for them and two it looks ugly. floyd has hand problems as well yet you dont see him slapping like that

as far as his resume smw was a ****ty division and he shouldntve stayed there. hopkins fought jones, johnson, tito, taylor - calzaghe fans point to kessler and lacy but they themseleves have never beat any big names. you can accuse jones and hopkins for ducking all you want but the fact is its calzaghes fault for staying in europe the whole time. america was/is the mecca of boxing and any european star is irrelevant to the average fan unless he fights here

and finally i dont see how barely beating a 43 yr hopkins elevates you to #1 or #2 p4p. in that sense i think he is overrated

Ok, good the thread is back on point.

You say that technique is important to you, and that you don't like the way Calzaghe punches. Fine, thats up to you and I can't argue. However, what about technique that is not punching, like timing, distance and movement? If you can appreciate these you must surely be able to find something to admire about Calzaghe. In the Lacy and Kessler fights, as well as many others, Calzaghe put on absolute masterclasses in these areas, at times making his opponent look silly. We all know how Calzaghe's movement bamboozled Lacy and against Kessler, Calzaghe's superior know-how basically took away Mikkels entire game. At points in the fight Kessler was punching the air where Calzaghe had just been and discovering that all of a sudden he was eating a flurry in return. These two performances are two of the best in the world in recent years and both were based on Calzaghe being massively technically superior to his opponent.

I am prepared to agree with you up to a point that SMW was not the best division during Calzaghe's reign, but neither was MW during Hopkins's or LHW during Jones's, in fact, when these divisions did start to strengthen and Taylor appeared at MW and Tarver and Johnson entered the picture at LHW, both Jones and Hopkins lost. In Calzaghe's case, when Kessler and Lacy appeared, he beat them both. An interesting parallel don't you think?

As for your statement "america was/is the mecca of boxing and any european star is irrelevant to the average fan unless he fights here", I'm sorry to say youn just polluted what was a decent post with the worst kind of biased ignorance.

[ExecutiveOutlaw]

Ok, good the thread is back on point.

You say that technique is important to you, and that you don't like the way Calzaghe punches. Fine, thats up to you and I can't argue. However, what about technique that is not punching, like timing, distance and movement? If you can appreciate these you must surely be able to find something to admire about Calzaghe. In the Lacy and Kessler fights, as well as many others, Calzaghe put on absolute masterclasses in these areas, at times making his opponent look silly. We all know how Calzaghe's movement bamboozled Lacy and against Kessler, Calzaghe's superior know-how basically took away Mikkels entire game. At points in the fight Kessler was punching the air where Calzaghe had just been and discovering that all of a sudden he was eating a flurry in return. These two performances are two of the best in the world in recent years and both were based on Calzaghe being massively technically superior to his opponent.

I am prepared to agree with you up to a point that SMW was not the best division during Calzaghe's reign, but neither was MW during Hopkins's or LHW during Jones's, in fact, when these divisions did start to strengthen and Taylor appeared at MW and Tarver and Johnson entered the picture at LHW, both Jones and Hopkins lost. In Calzaghe's case, when Kessler and Lacy appeared, he beat them both. An interesting parallel don't you think?

As for your statement "america was/is the mecca of boxing and any european star is irrelevant to the average fan unless he fights here", I'm sorry to say youn just polluted what was a decent post with the worst kind of biased ignorance.

i agree that calzaghe has good timing and movement, but as far as watching boxing goes this is not nearly as important as punching technique. i also agree that he outclassed lacy and kessler but i still question whether he couldve done that to a p4p fighter like hopkins did to tito

as far as hopkins and jones, i believe hopkins won at least one of those fights and taylor is a better fighter than kessler and lacy, imo at least. as far as jones i think that was due to him losing all that muscle from moving down as opposed to stayin in one division his whole career, so i dont think its very parallel at all

as far as the last statement you need to take that back. for one i never said i think its right, and secondly its the truth - ask the casual american fan who kessler or calzaghe was before the hopkins fight and they would tell you they didnt know. as far as the mainstream goes if you wanna be a "big name" you gotta fight in america, ask cotto, pacquaio, hatton, and calzaghe amongst others

[abadger]

i agree that calzaghe has good timing and movement, but as far as watching boxing goes this is not nearly as important as punching technique. i also agree that he outclassed lacy and kessler but i still question whether he couldve done that to a p4p fighter like hopkins did to tito

as far as hopkins and jones, i believe hopkins won at least one of those fights and taylor is a better fighter than kessler and lacy, imo at least. as far as jones i think that was due to him losing all that muscle from moving down as opposed to stayin in one division his whole career, so i dont think its very parallel at all

as far as the last statement you need to take that back. for one i never said i think its right, and secondly its the truth - ask the casual american fan who kessler or calzaghe was before the hopkins fight and they would tell you they didnt know. as far as the mainstream goes if you wanna be a "big name" you gotta fight in america, ask cotto, pacquaio, hatton, and calzaghe amongst others

OK, I take it back. If you don't think its right then thats cool. Its important for Americans to remember though that not knowing someone doesn't make them a poor fighter. See Abraham and Calzaghe himself.

[Vladimir303]

Ok, good the thread is back on point.

You say that technique is important to you, and that you don't like the way Calzaghe punches. Fine, thats up to you and I can't argue. However, what about technique that is not punching, like timing, distance and movement? If you can appreciate these you must surely be able to find something to admire about Calzaghe. In the Lacy and Kessler fights, as well as many others, Calzaghe put on absolute masterclasses in these areas, at times making his opponent look silly. We all know how Calzaghe's movement bamboozled Lacy and against Kessler, Calzaghe's superior know-how basically took away Mikkels entire game. At points in the fight Kessler was punching the air where Calzaghe had just been and discovering that all of a sudden he was eating a flurry in return. These two performances are two of the best in the world in recent years and both were based on Calzaghe being massively technically superior to his opponent..

You're trying to make it sound like a Pernell Whitaker-esque thing. Pernell's superior defense and boxing skills during his prime weren't as appriciated as they are now.

Calzaghe is nowhere near that. I appriciate Calzaghe as much as I appriciate John Ruiz. One clinches & holds and the other slaps but they're both effective at it and have some decent wins. That's as far as it goes.

Sweet Science or the unappricated art of pugilism......I don't think so.

[Vladimir303]

OK, I take it back. If you don't think its right then thats cool. Its important for Americans to remember though that not knowing someone doesn't make them a poor fighter. See Abraham and Calzaghe himself.

Not always but in most cases.

[The Surgeon]

I am often puzzled by the amount of hate Calzaghe gets on here, and have been wondering what is the root cause.

Its easy to say that his haters, usually Americans are biased because of nationality, but that doesn't explain much really. Even if you are a little nationalistic you still must have an opinion as to why Calzaghe does not deserve your respect.

My theory is you all actually just don't think he's a very good boxer, so if I'm right, could some of you please enlighten me as to why you feel this way? If not, then please share you hate and enlighten me anyway.

Thanks

Im not a hater and i dont troll against him but i dont like him. Mainly his messy style, slaps and crappy flurrys piss me off but thats not all, theres something else about the guy i just dont like.