Shouldn't Calzaque be considered a better fighter than mayweather?

[tommy boo boxer]

A lot of people consider mayweather a better fighter still. I dont get it, 1) calzaque faced better fighters than mayweather did, he has more wins and knockouts. Mayweather 2)milked his career, im not saying he is a bad fighter, but 3)I dont think he did enough to consider himself a all time great. Who do you guys consider better?

1) .... Fail.... are you serious? surely you cant be

2) and 3) these can both be applied to Joe Calzaghe.

[tommy boo boxer]

At least Calzaghe never lost.

At least Floyd never lost.

[tommy boo boxer]

I think both fighters were both very skilled boxers who never really challenged themselves against boxers with any equal skill.


Way to many B+ wins for two A+ fighters.

To be fair they both had one win against an A+ fighter.

hard not to agree with.. green k

[CaRnAgEViOLaToR]

mayweather is a better fighter than calzaghe period.

[Alec900]

no.just no

[BennyST]

Tunney do you even know who Jesus Chavez is?

He's thinking of the Jesus Chavez that Mayweather fought at the start of his career, not 'El Matador' Chavez who was a top contender in the 130 pound division and was a one time holder of the WBC SFW title and also one time holder of the IBF lightweight title.

Tunney, you got the wrong guy mate. Chavez is a pretty good fighter, and while he may not be great, he is as good as a lot of the guys on Calzaghe's record.

I think the problem here is that fans of both guys are exaggerating each guys record. Neither fighter has an amazing stellar record. I think Calzaghe ended facing the better fighter overall in Hopkins, who is the best fighter Calzonie ever faced and Mayweather never faced someone like Hopkins. But, Mayweather faced more generally good opposition and also moved up more weight classes.

Some of his wins, like Manfredy, N'Dou, Gerena, Juuko, Sosa, etc etc get too much credit, but then the guys like Castillo, Corrales, Hatton, Oscar at 154 were very good wins. In the same light, some of Calzaghe's wins get somewhat underrated, like Eubank which was a very good win.

So, I think when people list fifteen guys from Mayweather's record a lot of guys such as the Manfredy's, Sosa's, Chavez' and N'Dou's get mentioned too much (the aforementioned fighters on Mayweather's record have never won a title), and given too much credit while titlists and good champions on Calzaghe's record, such as Brewer, Mitchell, Woodhall, Reid, Veit, and yes, even Juan Carlos Ferrerya (the guy has fought literally everyone and only lost to the best and has been a top contender for a long time across a number of divisions. He would be hard to beat for anyone) don't get mentioned at all or are simply laughed at when they are mentioned.

While I think Mayweather has a better record and has a more consistent record, it is not completely daft to compare them. Check this out:

Mayweather titlists:
G. Hernandez (last ever fight)
Castillo
Corrales
Oscar (old)
Hatton
Mitchell (old)
Judah (?)
Baldomir
Gatti (shot)
Corley
C. Hernandez
Chavez

Schmoe Calzaghe titlsts:
Eubank (past it)
Reid
Woodhall
Veit
Brewer
Mitchell
Lacy
Kessler
Hopkins (old but still amazing)
Jones (old)

So they really are somewhat comparable. While some will no doubt say that none of those guys have ever been heard of in relation to the titlists on Calzaghe's record, they were nonetheless good fighters and good champions who defended their titles a number of times. This does not include the many guys like Juan Carlos that fought everyone from Roy Jones to Roberto Duran or other guys like Bika who are now going pretty strong in the SMW division.

There are a number of guys on Floyd's record that won their title and lost it immediately after. Chavez, Hernandez, Corley etc. Nonetheless, they did win a title and so deserve mention in there.

There we go then. When looked at without preconceived ideas they are actually rather comparable in the titlists they faced. Either way, both faced a number of good champions and both faced a number of past prime champions. One thing that will always get Calzaghe close to Mayweather, for me anyway, is that he faced a genuinely legendary fighter that is still more or less in his prime (no matter his age, Hopkins is still fighting nearly as well as ever) while Mayweather unfortunately never did. Nonetheless, it is not such a far gone conclusion to compare their records, nor to debate how close they are in such a comparison. When looked at like this, they are actually quite close.

[-Boxzilla-]

while there may be parallels and while they're both very talented imo mayweather beats jc both in talent and in record.

They both should have faced better but money became more careful in his opponents and more defensive as he went up in weight. whats jc's excuse?!

when people said pbf lost to castillo he re-matched him. when jc was told the same thing with reid he didnt fight him a second time to prove himself. but he did fight Mario Veit 2x a guy he ko'd in the first round 1st time around. to me thats indicative of his whole career.

[BennyST]

while there may be parallels and while they're both very talented imo mayweather beats jc both in talent and in record.

They both should have faced better but money became more careful in his opponents and more defensive as he went up in weight. whats jc's excuse?!

Indeed. I think the same, but I think anyone that has either guy way in front or believes that one is that much better than the other is plain wrong. Anyone saying that Mayweather ducked everyone is foolish and not looking at who he did fight and anyone that thinks Calzonie never faced anyone worth mention also only need to look at his record and see that he faced just about the same amount of champions as Mayweather, and possibly more that were in their prime, but, Mayweather moved up more divisions which is also a big thing in his favor, though this last thing is becoming more and more common these days and meaning less and less due to the amount of champions that one can pick and choose to face therefore becoming a 'champion' in another division while never actually facing the 'champion'.

[lest26]

both are oustanding fighters, oustanding boxers and both very clever, both have left the game after very long careers undefeated and both have not a scar on there faces, its quite unbelievable, most in this sport are lucky to walk away without having brain damage/slurred speech so i feel both could be placed on a even level for slightly diffrent reasons, calzaghe is much more aggressive both are cunning, joe hasnt won titles at as many diffrent levels and couldnt have realy, Mayweather had the advantage of been american which is a huge advantage in boxing, joe had more fights and regardless of what the pricks on here say were very tough fights, i applaud both these guys for here achivments but i dont like mayweathers attitude outside the ring but he brings alot to the sport in terms of entertainment.

[DiegoFuego]

A lot of people consider mayweather a better fighter still. I dont get it, calzaque faced better fighters than mayweather did, he has more wins and knockouts. Mayweather milked his career, im not saying he is a bad fighter, but I dont think he did enough to consider himself a all time great. Who do you guys consider better?

HAHAHAHAHAHAH yeah ****ing right