Calzaghe SMW greatest of all time?

[bsrizpac]

accomplishment wise....yes he is.

he would lose to prime Jones at 168

The reality you have just dropped on this thread, I'm sure will be ignored. Great post.

[Kris Silver]

Can you tell me who your source and any link would be perfect...

Sure, here you go.

http://www.calzaghe.com/pages/vs_jon...e_legends.html

Welcome.

[PrettyBoyFloyd7]

Is joe SMW king who is undefeated and has a record of 44-0-32 is greatest SMW of all time?

Roy Jones vs Joe Calzaghe (lets say in 1998) would look something like Jones v Telesco

[BLOODGOD]

Anyone who says he isn't the best ever SMW deserves no credibility.

List whose better and why.

Even Nigel Benn admitted Calzaghe would beat him and is the best SMW.

Benn on Calzaghe:

"If Joe had been around with me, Chris Eubank and Steve Collins, he would have had some harder fights than he gets today," he told The Sun. "But I still think he would have come out on top. You've got to give it to him, what he's achieved, being an undefeated world champion for a decade takes a special fighter. He would have had a good fight with me. He'd probably have beaten me although he would have known he'd been in a fight with me. I take my hat off to him. Joe's a credit to boxing.”

You exagirate a bit on the blue that i emphasize.. But thnx for that link..

[Deadbirds]

well Toney is overrated to i mean he got easily beat by roy jones

Yeah and Jones would,ve KOd 'Calslappy within 6 rounds ! I don't get your point ! Toney would've KO'd Calslappy ! I didn't remember Toney avoiding anyone !

[Dan...]

Yeah and Jones would,ve KOd 'Calslappy within 6 rounds ! I don't get your point ! Toney would've KO'd Calslappy ! I didn't remember Toney avoiding anyone !

Good to see you have learnt to use the quotation tool, it was beginning to get really annoying.

You don't seem to understand a critical concept - how to rate a fighter in a given division.

You have to look at their accomplishments and who they beat at that particular division in order to rate them, not match the fighters comparatively. I would favour both Jones and Toney to beat Calzaghe at 168, but does that mean they should be rated over him in terms of all time SMWs? *** no. You need to look at who the fighters beat and what they accomplished.

In an earlier post you asked me to list Calzaghe's respectable names on his resume at 168. Clearly his two best wins at the weight are Kessler and Lacy, two prime young champions that Calzaghe beat comprehensively. In addition to those two he also beat several other very good fighters - Eubank (albiet past prime), Sheika, Brewer, Reid and Mitchell amoung others.

Sure he doesn't have a fantastic resume but name me a SMW with a better one. Ottke? His resume is basically Calzaghe's minus Eubank, Lacy and Kessler. You also need to keep in mind that several of those were extremely favourable decisions. Ottke does not even compare to Calzaghe.

As for Virgil Hill, he is one of the top 175 pounders of the modern era for sure. He had a couple of very decent reigns as champ and only lost to two of the divisions top fighters of that time. But is he anywhere close to the best LHW of all time? Good god no. You need to remember that, unlike the LHW division, the SMW division has only been around for just over 2 decades.

The other contenders you mention - Benn, Toney and Jones. Roy Jones' resume at SMW - Toney, Lucas and a few other B level fighters - best SMW of all time? Haha. How about JT - pretty much just Iran Barkley. Benn - McClellan and a draw against Eubank (in a fight he should have got the decision in) are is only notable achievements at 168 - not even in the ballpark of Joe Calzaghe.

So again, to say that Calzaghe is not the best 168 pounder in the division's history one must either be totally blinded by hate or unaware of how to approach rating fighters within a certain division. Which are you?

[MANGLER]

Division ain't that old but he's obviously been the most dominant fighter there. Not many others stayed there long enuf to get their name thrown in the hat.

[IMDAZED]

Good to see you have learnt to use the quotation tool, it was beginning to get really annoying.

You don't seem to understand a critical concept - how to rate a fighter in a given division.

You have to look at their accomplishments and who they beat at that particular division in order to rate them, not match the fighters comparatively. I would favour both Jones and Toney to beat Calzaghe at 168, but does that mean they should be rated over him in terms of all time SMWs? *** no. You need to look at who the fighters beat and what they accomplished.

In an earlier post you asked me to list Calzaghe's respectable names on his resume at 168. Clearly his two best wins at the weight are Kessler and Lacy, two prime young champions that Calzaghe beat comprehensively. In addition to those two he also beat several other very good fighters - Eubank (albiet past prime), Sheika, Brewer, Reid and Mitchell amoung others.

Sure he doesn't have a fantastic resume but name me a SMW with a better one. Ottke? His resume is basically Calzaghe's minus Eubank, Lacy and Kessler. You also need to keep in mind that several of those were extremely favourable decisions. Ottke does not even compare to Calzaghe.

As for Virgil Hill, he is one of the top 175 pounders of the modern era for sure. He had a couple of very decent reigns as champ and only lost to two of the divisions top fighters of that time. But is he anywhere close to the best LHW of all time? Good god no. You need to remember that, unlike the LHW division, the SMW division has only been around for just over 2 decades.

The other contenders you mention - Benn, Toney and Jones. Roy Jones' resume at SMW - Toney, Lucas and a few other B level fighters - best SMW of all time? Haha. How about JT - pretty much just Iran Barkley. Benn - McClellan and a draw against Eubank (in a fight he should have got the decision in) are is only notable achievements at 168 - not even in the ballpark of Joe Calzaghe.

So again, to say that Calzaghe is not the best 168 pounder in the division's history one must either be totally blinded by hate or unaware of how to approach rating fighters within a certain division. Which are you?

Nicely put.

[Deadbirds]

Good to see you have learnt to use the quotation tool, it was beginning to get really annoying.

You don't seem to understand a critical concept - how to rate a fighter in a given division.

You have to look at their accomplishments and who they beat at that particular division in order to rate them, not match the fighters comparatively. I would favour both Jones and Toney to beat Calzaghe at 168, but does that mean they should be rated over him in terms of all time SMWs? *** no. You need to look at who the fighters beat and what they accomplished.

In an earlier post you asked me to list Calzaghe's respectable names on his resume at 168. Clearly his two best wins at the weight are Kessler and Lacy, two prime young champions that Calzaghe beat comprehensively. In addition to those two he also beat several other very good fighters - Eubank (albiet past prime), Sheika, Brewer, Reid and Mitchell amoung others.

Sure he doesn't have a fantastic resume but name me a SMW with a better one. Ottke? His resume is basically Calzaghe's minus Eubank, Lacy and Kessler. You also need to keep in mind that several of those were extremely favourable decisions. Ottke does not even compare to Calzaghe.

As for Virgil Hill, he is one of the top 175 pounders of the modern era for sure. He had a couple of very decent reigns as champ and only lost to two of the divisions top fighters of that time. But is he anywhere close to the best LHW of all time? Good god no. You need to remember that, unlike the LHW division, the SMW division has only been around for just over 2 decades.

The other contenders you mention - Benn, Toney and Jones. Roy Jones' resume at SMW - Toney, Lucas and a few other B level fighters - best SMW of all time? Haha. How about JT - pretty much just Iran Barkley. Benn - McClellan and a draw against Eubank (in a fight he should have got the decision in) are is only notable achievements at 168 - not even in the ballpark of Joe Calzaghe.

So again, to say that Calzaghe is not the best 168 pounder in the division's history one must either be totally blinded by hate or unaware of how to approach rating fighters within a certain division. Which are you?

Is that your age ? 1984 ! How long have you watched boxing ! Again your making no sense your saying Calslappy is the best because how long he stayed in the division ! And how many title defenses he made ! If thats how you judge a fighter in the division than give Ottke his due ! He retired undefeated and made many defenses ! Sure Calslappy had a slightly better resume ! But they both fought the same average and below average fighters ! As for the Benn comment I think beating the bomber McCellan overshadows anything that Calslappy did ! Lacy ( watchout real powerhouse here ) or A past his prime Eubank (watchout another killer ) or Kessler ( By the way who has he fought ?) A prime Eubank really wasn't bad ! If you actually watched any of his prime fights you would see that he! Sure he 45 - 0 before he lost but he fought mainly cans just as Calslappy ! So Benn was the more exciting fighter and again I think Benn would've KO'd him maybe even a prime Eubank ! They both hit hard !

[Mugwump]

Calzaghe == Ottke? Seriously?

Look, I'll accept that Joe - like all home fighters - has benefited from the occasional bit of dubious judging. But there's no comparison with the outrageous robberies that Ottke has had handed to him.

Anyone who claims otherwise hasn't watched any Ottke fights and is thus talking out of his ass.