What Makes Joe Calzaghe's Resume Great?
Collapse
-
Your point was that he's never had to make excuses for a loss. That's fine, I agree with that Captain Obvious. Since he's never had an official loss. I'm just pointing out that excuses surround his career and resume in just about every other way. That is all.So in answer to my point about Calzaghe never having fallen victim to the kind of 'slip up' that routinely afflicts nearly all other great fighters, your response is that he once had a close fight to Reid (but still won) and sometimes had off-colour performances (but still won).
I think this somewhat underlines my point.Comment
-
How odd, I remember you incessantly going on about Baldomir being the WW champion when trying to prove that he was better than Eubank.
I guess you pick your criteria based upon what suits your agenda, eh?Comment
-
Comment
-
Good promoting, great management, Joe's never beaten a great fighter in thier prime, good yes but not greatI'll tell you:
Lack of excuses.
Joe Calzaghe's career is quite without the kind of 'slip ups' that are conveniently overlooked and excused on the resumes of others. Roy Jones got old against Tarver and Johnson, despite being younger than Calzaghe is now. Or perhaps he was weight drained? Perhaps in that case he shouldn't have been fighting. Same goes for James Toney and his losses to Thadzi and Griffin. Perhaps these guys fought a higher standard of opposition than Calzaghe has as a whole, but they didn't lose to them (well, actually Toney did), they lost to guys they should have beat.
Never happened to Joe Calzaghe. He has fought as champion from the age of 25 til 36 without requiring an excuse of any kind even once. How come so few others have managed this?Comment
-
Calzaghe deserves respect. He beat the living day lights out of Left Hook Lacy. Beat Hopkins convincingly that no rematch was required.Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment

Comment