Joe Calzaghe Felt Chad Dawson Wasn't Ready Yet

[MELLY-MEL...]

I understand why he didn't fight Dawson and why he rather fought Hopkins and Jones and as much as wanted Dawson to get the recognition by fighting and beating Joe, i must say iit was a very smart decision of Calzaghe's part. Fighting Hopkins and Jones were not only easier fights for Calzaghe and both older then him, but he also made more money against them then he would against Dawson who i feel would have beaten him.

good post slick.

[2501]

I understand why he didn't fight Dawson and why he rather fought Hopkins and Jones and as much as wanted Dawson to get the recognition by fighting and beating Joe, i must say it was a very smart decision of Calzaghe's part. Fighting Hopkins and Jones were not only easier fights for Calzaghe and both older then him, but he also made more money against them then he would against Dawson who i feel would have beaten him.

Thats fine, his fans who keep posting that Joe fought Jones because "Jones was a harder fight than Dawson" need to realize this.

[Dave Rado]

This is a ridiculous post. Explain to me how a win over Peter Manfredo jr. and Roy Jones Jr do more for his legacy than Chad Dawson.

The Manfredo fight wasn't his last fight or even close - he wasn't ready to retire then. That fight was just to give him some more US exposure, because of the Contender's popularity. When it comes to the point you're ready to retire, then it needs something really special to keep you going for one more fight. Of course he wouldn't have fought a Manfredo in his farewell fight. As for Jones, he'd wanted to fight Jones for years and finally got the opportunity. Earlier would have been better but he didn't have the opportunity earlier (see my sig). It was no worse than Lewis fighting a shot Tyson for very similar reasons. Plus not only he but a lot of boxing writers thought after the Jones-Trinidad fight that Jones had something left in the tank after all, not because he won, but because he looked good in winning.

[Sparked_1985]

Money? The 0 on the record, who cares....Nothings worth more than a legacy left by a great fighter. When you are ready to put a side Money, and a perfect record and fight for your mark in history, thats what makes you great. JOE surely isnt great

You might be right,

But by that logic, there are no great fighters in boxing today.

It's prizefighting. Usually the best fights mean the most money, but that is usually.

And Joe Calzaghe is 37 years old, he's not going to keep proving himself for strenghthening his legacy unless he gets good money. He is what he is, and he has achieved now, all that he is likely going to. Chad Dawson is the new kid on the block and good luck to him, but Joe never had to fight him. Boxing doesn't really need it to happen, and it is far more an appealing proposal for Dawson than Calzaghe. Calzaghe is a prize scalp, Dawson not so much, not yet anyway.

[Dave Rado]

Thats fine, his fans who keep posting that Joe fought Jones because "Jones was a harder fight than Dawson" need to realize this.

No Calzaghe said he thought Jones was a harder fight than Pavlik would have been - and to be fair, he said he thought Pavlik was one-dimensional long before Hopkins showed he was right about that. Dawson wasn't really being discussed until after the Jones fight had happened. And he's always shown a lot of respect for Dawson's abilities, just said he is still on his way up and unproven.

[nairbon357]

In simple, 46 fights, he lose none of them, he defend is title 21 time, unify all the title of is weight class, gave a boxing lesson to everyone who were suppose to whoop is @ss, never backed up to any one in the ring(he doesnt fear to trade shot for shot), he took on Manfredo and Lacy to make a name for himself in the U.S. to make two money Money fight and then watch tv and taking some pound probably...
Go see is resume man, you will know more.
And go on youtube to see is fight, Joe gave impressive beating to most of is opponent.

"ok... I thought when you click on the quick reply, you could reply to someone in particular... look like is not the case, so my post go to miamijohn who ask: what Joe accomplish."

[Dave Rado]

Chad Dawson is the new kid on the block and good luck to him, but Joe never had to fight him. Boxing doesn't really need it to happen, and it is far more an appealing proposal for Dawson than Calzaghe. Calzaghe is a prize scalp, Dawson not so much, not yet anyway.

From boxing's point of view, if Calzaghe had beaten Dawson decisively and immediately retired, I think that would have been bad for the health of the Light-Heavyweight division, because it would then have had a much less credible champion. And if he'd beaten Dawson narrowly or controversially and then retired, it would have been like Lewis-Vitali, it would have haunted Dawson for the rest of his career. So the only way the fight would not have been bad for boxing is if Joe had lost - not really a great incentive to fight someone!

[miamijohn]

You might be right,

But by that logic, there are no great fighters in boxing today.

It's prizefighting. Usually the best fights mean the most money, but that is usually.

And Joe Calzaghe is 37 years old, he's not going to keep proving himself for strenghthening his legacy unless he gets good money. He is what he is, and he has achieved now, all that he is likely going to. Chad Dawson is the new kid on the block and good luck to him, but Joe never had to fight him. Boxing doesn't really need it to happen, and it is far more an appealing proposal for Dawson than Calzaghe. Calzaghe is a prize scalp, Dawson not so much, not yet anyway.

I can see that. But they are, even though its all about the money;alot of great fighters. Its the Managers and Promoters that screw it up....But needless to say, there are great fihters.... and Joe aint one>

[IMDAZED]

From boxing's point of view, if Calzaghe had beaten Dawson decisively and immediately retired, I think that would have been bad for the health of the Light-Heavyweight division, because it would then have had a much less credible champion. And if he'd beaten Dawson narrowly or controversially and then retired, it would have been like Lewis-Vitali, it would have haunted Dawson for the rest of his career. So the only way the fight would not have been bad for boxing is if Joe had lost - not really a great incentive to fight someone!

Come on, Dave. Boxing doesn't work that way. There are way too many possiblities to narrow it down to those two as proof that Calzaghe not fighting Dawson is somehow for the greater good of the sport. The sport thrives on the best match-ups. Sure the casual fans are attracted to the names but it's the hardcore ones who keep the sport alive. These are the fights we want to see - take a look around.

[Dave Rado]

I can see that. But they are, even though its all about the money;alot of great fighters. Its the Managers and Promoters that screw it up....But needless to say, there are great fihters.... and Joe aint one>

You're entitled to your opinion but plenty of boxing experts disagree. None would rate him at the level of Leonard or Hagler, but many boxing experts rate him alongside Lennox Lewis and they all agree he'll get into the Hall of Fame (whether you like it or not).