Calzaghe vs. Hagler @ 168
Collapse
-
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
If Calzaghe boxed on the backfoot and avoided standing toe-to-toe, he could win a few rounds by flurrying and then moving away, as Leonard did. However Calzaghe doesn't fight this way and I doubt that he'd suddenly be able to do so. Even if he did, I think he'd lose to prime Hagler.
I think Calzaghe would have a better chance with the Leonard that beat Hagler than with Hagler himself.
I'm not saying that he'd beat Sugar Ray, but to be honest I don't think that he looked particularly good above 160.Comment
-
We're talking about a prime Hagler though. The prime Hagler was quicker, lighter on his feet, touhger to hit than the one in 1987 (or after 1983, period).If Calzaghe boxed on the backfoot and avoided standing toe-to-toe, he could win a few rounds by flurrying and then moving away, as Leonard did. However Calzaghe doesn't fight this way and I doubt that he'd suddenly be able to do so. Even if he did, I think he'd lose to prime Hagler.
I think Calzaghe would have a better chance with the Leonard that beat Hagler than with Hagler himself.
I'm not saying that he'd beat Sugar Ray, but to be honest I don't think that he looked particularly good above 160.Comment
-
Comment
-
Im picking the greatest 168lb of all time.Joe wouldn't trade with him he would outbox his short opponet who has the perfect style for Joe BTW . Joe has a good chin unlike Hearns.Comment
-
Comment

Comment