lacy was not a top fighter jones and eubank wer past their primes hopkins was still good but not at his peak (would have beaten calzaghe in his day) kessler is the only top quality fighter calzaghe has fought. All of those fighters would have beaten calzaghe except maybe benn because of the weight difference, leonard was smaller but would be to quick and clever for JOE. Calzaghe was the best of a bad division. When benn fought the super middleweight division was a tough divison.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Nigel Benn: "Calzaghe Beats Me, Hagler, Hearns, Sugar"
Collapse
-
Fact is, prime for prime, Calzaghe vs Hopkins, Calzaghe vs Jones, and, Calzaghe vs Toney would have all been close fights, and gone the distance.
Calzaghe is miles better than he is given credit for. He is unbeaten, no matter what opposition he has faced. Jones lost to fighters like Johnson, and Tarver. Hopkins lost to fighters like Taylor. None of those defeats were against great opponents.
He may not have fought the best, but at least he didn't lose to the average. But saying that Kessler, and Hopkins were the best around his weight.
Comment
-
The Leonard/Hagler/Hearns/Duran era was truly a special time in boxing, four atg's facing eachother at (or just past) thier primes, each of their fights, barring maybe Hagler v Duran have gone down in history. To say that Calzaghe beats them is offensive, delusional and just plain and simply ****ing wrong
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by big paulie View PostThe Leonard/Hagler/Hearns/Duran era was truly a special time in boxing, four atg's facing eachother at (or just past) thier primes, each of their fights, barring maybe Hagler v Duran have gone down in history. To say that Calzaghe beats them is offensive, delusional and just plain and simply ****ing wrong
We're talking Lightweights, Welterweights and Middleweights here. Great ones but smaller guys - much, much smaller in Duran and Leonard's case.
Comment
-
Originally posted by big paulie View PostThe Leonard/Hagler/Hearns/Duran era was truly a special time in boxing, four atg's facing eachother at (or just past) thier primes, each of their fights, barring maybe Hagler v Duran have gone down in history. To say that Calzaghe beats them is offensive, delusional and just plain and simply ****ing wrong
Comment
-
Co-sign...
Originally posted by smirf123 View Postlacy was not a top fighter jones and eubank wer past their primes hopkins was still good but not at his peak (would have beaten calzaghe in his day) kessler is the only top quality fighter calzaghe has fought. All of those fighters would have beaten calzaghe except maybe benn because of the weight difference, leonard was smaller but would be to quick and clever for JOE. Calzaghe was the best of a bad division. When benn fought the super middleweight division was a tough divison.Yes, very good analysis...i agree w/ you...
Comment
-
I think Calzaghe stands a very good chance against all the great middleweights, super middleweights, and Light HW, in any era. It would be incredibly naive to think otherwise giving the fact that Joe has never lost.
Comment
-
Maybe not...
Originally posted by SHB View PostOffensive is dismissing any argument because you don't agree with it.
We're talking Lightweights, Welterweights and Middleweights here. Great ones but smaller guys - much, much smaller in Duran and Leonard's case.
Comment
Comment