Who's the biggest boxer with the most bums on his record?

[krispy kreme]

So what if it bothers me? Indeed. But if you didn't notice, this is a forum where people exchange opinions, disagree and discuss. It doesn't actually bother me much at all. Hopefully I made you think about it for a minute though.

OK. I don't like the word because these "bums" are dudes who are just trying to earn a living and pay their bills. They put their lives on the line every time they step into the ring. To me, that is worthy of respect.

The word "bum" can be replaced with "sub-par fighter" or something. I'm not having a go at you for using the word, but if you would care to backtrack for a second, you'll notice it was you who took it further and turned it into an argument. I merely said "I don't like the word", and left it at that.

Good post man, most people only care about themselves, so it doesn't bother them to bad mind a person they don't know. I include myself when I say this.

[them_apples]

You can't honestly believe that?

why not? Calzaghe is hardly the "best fighter of this generation" like some people think. A lot of guys could have wooped on a shot Jones. The fact that he beat Hopkins based on moving his arms as fast as he can to gain points (sometimes for shots that didn't even land) makes me not like him anymore. He just screams fraud to me. It was clear Hopkins did more Damage to Calzaghe in that fight to.

[Enemy/Friend]

why not? Calzaghe is hardly the "best fighter of this generation" like some people think. A lot of guys could have wooped on a shot Jones. The fact that he beat Hopkins based on moving his arms as fast as he can to gain points (sometimes for shots that didn't even land) makes me not like him anymore. He just screams fraud to me. It was clear Hopkins did more Damage to Calzaghe in that fight to.

Eleven years holding his WBO belt

Over twenty consecutive title defenses at Super-Middleweight

Holding two Ring belts

UNDEFEATED

What more do you want him to accomplish?

[S A M U R A I]

Honestly, i know you are a peaceful guy and tend to not hate on any boxers, but in comparison to everyone else, Calzaghe is a huge pick and chooser. If Calzaghe was a contender or ranked as a decent LHW I'd just think he was trying to work his way up and would think of him as a great boxer. The fact is, he just recently came to the states, fought one top contender - pulled off an ugly win and then beat a non ranked shot Jones (who Tarver made short work of) good boxer, but not anywhere near what people think he is. I'd pick Hopkins, even at 43, to win a rematch - but that won't happen.

It's pointless arguing opinions, you are entitled to yours and that's cool, but to suggest Joe Calzaghe has the most "bums" on his record out of ANY fighter on the planet, well, it's just not true, there are far worse out there. Granted, his resume could be better, nobody can disagree with that, but much of the blame can also be placed on Frank Warren, seeing as he was the promoter. As soon as Calzaghe ditched Warren, he came to the USA and fought the names he always wanted to fight in Hopkins and Jones. He was desperate for a fight with Hopkins going back as far as 7 years ago, and indeed, he had a fight scheduled with him in 2002. Blame Hopkins for backing out of the agreement, not Joe.

I have seen a number interviews and post-fight interviews from many years ago where he said Hopkins was his ultimate fight. Don't get me wrong, Calzaghe ain't no angel, he should have ditched Warren long ago, and I think he probably realizes that now, but it was too late.

Chris Eubank
Roy Jones
Bernard Hopkins
Mikkel Kessler
Robin Reid
Byron Mitchell
Charles Brewer
Omar Sheika
Jeff Lacy
Sakio Bika
Richie Woodhall
Mario Veit

There are some excellent names, and a few slightly less than stellar ones, but all of them are solid wins and nothing to be ashamed of. Going back to Hagler, undoubtedly a top 5 greatest middleweight of all time, if you remove Duran, Hearns and Leonard from his resume, it becomes significantly less impressive. Most average boxing fans wouldn't recognize so many of the names that are left. It's cool though, it doesn't take anything away from his greatness.

My point stands: Calzaghe doesn't have the worst resume of all time by a long shot.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[them_apples]

Eleven years holding his WBO belt

Over twenty consecutive title defenses at Super-Middleweight

Holding two Ring belts

UNDEFEATED

What more do you want him to accomplish?

no offense, but all his accomplishments are based on QUANTITY. Boxing is a 1v1 sport, based on who beats who. Beating nobodies and fighters past their best isn't the best way to call yourself the best boxer in the world.

Is Marciano the best heavyweight because he never lost? On paper he has beat joe Louis, Wallcott, Charles and Moore...and he's undefeated 49-0.

When you break it down, most people don't give him a chance against any top heavyweight even with a 10+ losses on their records (Holyfield)

staying in a weak division in Europe fighting nobodies and fighters past their best won't make you the best boxer of this generation, maybe the "longest belt holder" or something.

[them_apples]

It's pointless arguing opinions, you are entitled to yours and that's cool, but to suggest Joe Calzaghe has the most "bums" on his record out of ANY fighter on the planet, well, it's just not true, there are far worse out there. Granted, his resume could be better, nobody can disagree with that, but much of the blame can also be placed on Frank Warren, seeing as he was the promoter. As soon as Calzaghe ditched Warren, he came to the USA and fought the names he always wanted to fight in Hopkins and Jones. He was desperate for a fight with Hopkins going back as far as 7 years ago, and indeed, he had a fight scheduled with him in 2002. Blame Hopkins for backing out of the agreement, not Joe.

I have seen a number interviews and post-fight interviews from many years ago where he said Hopkins was his ultimate fight. Don't get me wrong, Calzaghe ain't no angel, he should have ditched Warren long ago, and I think he probably realizes that now, but it was too late.

Chris Eubank
Roy Jones
Bernard Hopkins
Mikkel Kessler
Robin Reid
Byron Mitchell
Charles Brewer
Omar Sheika
Jeff Lacy
Sakio Bika
Richie Woodhall
Mario Veit

There are some excellent names, and a few slightly less than stellar ones, but all of them are solid wins and nothing to be ashamed of. Going back to Hagler, undoubtedly a top 5 greatest middleweight of all time, if you remove Duran, Hearns and Leonard from his resume, it becomes significantly less impressive. Most average boxing fans wouldn't recognize so many of the names that are left. It's cool though, it doesn't take anything away from his greatness.

My point stands: Calzaghe doesn't have the worst resume of all time by a long shot.

that list isn't really that impressive when you factor in Jones being shot, and Hopkins being and ugly win against a "good" 43 year old. Almost everyone on that list won't even be remembered in 10 years.

Leonard, Duran and Hearns are all GREAT boxers. Hagler fought them when they were at their best, that alone makes him one of the greatest middleweights. Calzaghe hasn't fought any great fighter at their best.

true Calzaghe doesn't have the worst resume of all time, but for the amount of hype he get's it makes his resume look even worse.

[Roger Yomama]

Mike Tyson.

[them_apples]

Mike Tyson.

Even tyson has Career defining wins, Demolishing Spinks in 1 round, being the only man to knock out Holmes (who went 12 with Holyfield and beat prime mercer after wards) and being the youngest HW champion ever.

[S A M U R A I]

that list isn't really that impressive when you factor in Jones being shot, and Hopkins being and ugly win against a "good" 43 year old. Almost everyone on that list won't even be remembered in 10 years.

Leonard, Duran and Hearns are all GREAT boxers. Hagler fought them when they were at their best, that alone makes him one of the greatest middleweights. Calzaghe hasn't fought any great fighter at their best.

true Calzaghe doesn't have the worst resume of all time, but for the amount of hype he get's it makes his resume look even worse.

As I said, you are entitled to your opinion. Without wishing to sound ignorant and pig-headed, you are unlikely to change mine. Joe is an excellent fighter, and I believe he is far better than his resume suggests. I think the same can also be said of Mikkel Kessler, too.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[Enemy/Friend]

no offense, but all his accomplishments are based on QUANTITY. Boxing is a 1v1 sport, based on who beats who. Beating nobodies and fighters past their best isn't the best way to call yourself the best boxer in the world.

Is Marciano the best heavyweight because he never lost? On paper he has beat joe Louis, Wallcott, Charles and Moore...and he's undefeated 49-0.

When you break it down, most people don't give him a chance against any top heavyweight even with a 10+ losses on their records (Holyfield)

staying in a weak division in Europe fighting nobodies and fighters past their best won't make you the best boxer of this generation, maybe the "longest belt holder" or something.

The thing I hate most about your opinion is your claim that Calzaghe fought all these bums in Europe. Was it his fault that he didn't have a contract with HBO? Frank Warren should shoulder alot of the blame also. Calzaghe came over and fought in America twice and even if he didn't do that his legacy should not be diminished. Joe can make enough money fighting in Cardif but he chose to fight in the US. Hopkins was ranked number one in the Light Heavyweight division. Kessler was Ranked number two in the SMW division and Lacy was highly ranked also. Give him some credit.