Calzaghe and Dawson: a double standard about fighting old opponents

**UnDeniable** · 05-28-2009, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by ~Tunney

Interesting how Joe Calzaghe took so much abuse on this forum for fighting two old fighters, Bernard Hopkins and Roy Jones Jr.

Chad Dawson will now have FOUR fights in a row against 40 year olds, but the same people who were so hard on Calzaghe are not saying anything - in fact they are making excuses for Dawson.

The age 26 Dawson dropped TWO titles to avoid mandatories with prime opponents (Adrian Diaconu and Tavoris Cloud) in order to fight 40 year olds. As well, he avoided Diaconu in June 2007 and fought clubfighter Jesus Ruiz, and again avoided him early in 2008 to take the first fight with Johnson.

Calzaghe was old himself, he had been an amateur in the late 80s and pro since the early 90s and now is retired, while Dawson is in his 20s.

Why did Calzaghe take so much criticism, while Dawson gets away with it? I'm sure for pointing this out, I will receive a lot of criticism myself - but no one said much about those like bsrizpac who expressed their extreme displeasure with Calzaghe day after day in this forum .

Is there a double standard?

I'm not a huge fan of Joe but he gets unfairly criticised a lot on here

I don't blame him for taking the Hop/RJJ fights, just like Pac shouln't be criticised for fighting shot weightdrained Oscar $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

**hammerhiem** · 05-28-2009, 05:11 AM

Yes there is, but in Bsrixpac's defence he has never defended Dawson fighting 40 year olds.

more to the point if you're going to fight 40 year olds BHop + RJJ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Johnson +tarver.

**AGM** · 05-28-2009, 05:12 AM

I'm JC fan but I think that this point of view comes from the fact that Joe may have had the opportunities to fight these guys much earlier, whereas Dawson didn't.

**gingeralbino** · 05-28-2009, 05:12 AM

they're are both doing the same thing, and i dont mean fighting old people, they are fighting the people who bring the most money to the table.

**boxasmash** · 05-28-2009, 05:15 AM

roy jones was 39, calzaghe only fought 1 40 year old.

**ACHlLLES** · 05-28-2009, 05:19 AM

Seeing how Hopkins was ranked as the best lhw, whats the huge problem that Calzaghe fought the best lhw at his first fight at lhw? Oh no Bhop is 40 something, big whoop he was still rated as the best lhw.

**Chunk..** · 05-28-2009, 05:21 AM

The 'old guys' just happen to be bigger names and a bigger pay day.

**Silencers** · 05-28-2009, 05:21 AM

Jones was considered shot or way past his best in 2005, his best win before Calzaghe was over an old, out of shape Tito Trinidad, I don't remember much criticism about him fighting Hopkins. Tarver had a good win over Woods before fighting Dawson and I think Johnson was his mandatory and is still considered a top light heavyweight.

**The Hammer** · 05-28-2009, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by hammerhiem

Yes there is, but in Bsrixpac's defence he has never defended Dawson fighting 40 year olds.

But others like danc1984 have bashed Calzaghe a lot, but yesterday he was abusing me for suggesting that Dawson fight both his mandatory Cloud and Johnson this year.

Is three fights in a year really impossible for a 26 year old?

Also, Calzaghe fought the best young opponent in his division, Mikkel Kessler, who was both WBC and WBA champion.

Will Dawson ever face another prime opponent? He did fight Adamek to win his first title, but Tomasz was weight-drained (much like Eubank was weight-drained when Calzaghe fought him).

Calzaghe and Dawson: a double standard about fighting old opponents