How would Calzaghe do in this tourny?

[Kris Silver]

A poll of Calzaghe against Kessler or Taylor 6 months ago, Calzaghe is agreed by all to beat both comfortably.

How the hell does he now suddenly lose to won of them, especially when his work rate and stamina is better than Froch's, amongst other things.

Let alone, how do Abraham, or either Andre beat him.

The exaggeration as to how good these guys in the tourney is literally ****ing amazing. It really is.

A bit of hype, name promotion and sudden spot light, and suddenly everyones a top level proven elite fighter capable of beating anyone.

Taylor should have dominated a broken Lacy, and then lost to Froch whom is far from great.

Kesslers spent ages getting a belt back and defending it.

The others are either not accomplished enough at MW let alone SMW, or are just Olympic winners with the usual hype.

Its already been said in here, but Hopkins or Calzaghe in this tournament quite simply would be favourites. Hopkins might pick up one loss to Taylors sound boxing again, but thats it.

Calzaghe being knocked out by one of these, well that's foolish. Kesslers roughly as hard hitting as Froch or Abraham and he took upper cuts flush and was fine.

Work rate, he's ahead.

Stamina, he's ahead.

Speed he's one of the fastest still.

Experience.

Adapting.

Provide some solid backed up reasons as to how Calzaghe picks up a loss.

[Chunk..]

Nobody in the history of mankind could beat Calzaghe.

Calzaghe is god.

[Cotto Rules]

Not a Calzaghe fan but i have to admit that he would dominate the tournament. He completely dominated Mikkel Kessler who is one of the 2 big favourites to win the whole thing.
Calzaghe is the best supermiddleweight of the 2000 years but not the best lightheavyweight though. I still think B-Hop was a better LightHeavy.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Nobody in the history of mankind could beat Calzaghe.

Calzaghe is god.

Thats a bit insulting.

Could God beat Mikkel Kessler?

[The_Demon]

A poll of Calzaghe against Kessler or Taylor 6 months ago, Calzaghe is agreed by all to beat both comfortably.

How the hell does he now suddenly lose to won of them, especially when his work rate and stamina is better than Froch's, amongst other things.

Let alone, how do Abraham, or either Andre beat him.

The exaggeration as to how good these guys in the tourney is literally ****ing amazing. It really is.

A bit of hype, name promotion and sudden spot light, and suddenly everyones a top level proven elite fighter capable of beating anyone.

Taylor should have dominated a broken Lacy, and then lost to Froch whom is far from great.

Kesslers spent ages getting a belt back and defending it.

The others are either not accomplished enough at MW let alone SMW, or are just Olympic winners with the usual hype.

Its already been said in here, but Hopkins or Calzaghe in this tournament quite simply would be favourites. Hopkins might pick up one loss to Taylors sound boxing again, but thats it.

Calzaghe being knocked out by one of these, well that's foolish. Kesslers roughly as hard hitting as Froch or Abraham and he took upper cuts flush and was fine.

Work rate, he's ahead.

Stamina, he's ahead.

Speed he's one of the fastest still.

Experience.

Adapting.

Provide some solid backed up reasons as to how Calzaghe picks up a loss.

people find it too accept the fact that calzaghe dominates anyone at 168-its that simple

[johnm is...]

I imagine he'd win it.

[BG_Knocc_Out]

I don't think he'd go undefeated.

Looking at one vs one, sure you can say calzaghe would beat all of them, but you have to consider that he'd have 4-5 tough fights in a row. Calzaghe never had 3 tough fights in a row in his career! He would fight a good opponent, then fight 5 bums, etc.

Have him fight Taylor, Froch, Kessler, Ward, Dirrell and Abraham all in a row? He's losing at least one fight.

Oh, and these fighters have? Dirrel? Ward? Froch? Abraham? I mean I understand Calzaghe has had 46 fights, but Kessler has had over 40, and most could only name one of his opponents, which was Calzaghe. Same case with all these fighters besides maybe Taylor. Dont tyry and rip on Joe when all these contestants suffer the same "problem" as you're making it out to be. And all these fighters in the tournment will also have to fight 4-5 tough fights in a row, why are you acting like Calzaghe is the only one weak to this? So, for example, Froch could fight 4 tough fights in a row in this tourment and make easy pickings with the last fighters, but if Joe was in Frochs spot, he wouldn't last? You have to realize all these fighters are in the same exact position as eachother, but you are revolving around this concept that "Joe has never faught anybody". I know I'm coming off as an *******, which I'm trying not to be, but I'm trying to explain the loose ends in your post.

[starjammer]

A poll of Calzaghe against Kessler or Taylor 6 months ago, Calzaghe is agreed by all to beat both comfortably.

How the hell does he now suddenly lose to won of them, especially when his work rate and stamina is better than Froch's, amongst other things.

Let alone, how do Abraham, or either Andre beat him.

The exaggeration as to how good these guys in the tourney is literally ****ing amazing. It really is.

A bit of hype, name promotion and sudden spot light, and suddenly everyones a top level proven elite fighter capable of beating anyone.

Taylor should have dominated a broken Lacy, and then lost to Froch whom is far from great.

Kesslers spent ages getting a belt back and defending it.

The others are either not accomplished enough at MW let alone SMW, or are just Olympic winners with the usual hype.

Its already been said in here, but Hopkins or Calzaghe in this tournament quite simply would be favourites. Hopkins might pick up one loss to Taylors sound boxing again, but thats it.

Calzaghe being knocked out by one of these, well that's foolish. Kesslers roughly as hard hitting as Froch or Abraham and he took upper cuts flush and was fine.

Work rate, he's ahead.

Stamina, he's ahead.

Speed he's one of the fastest still.

Experience.

Adapting.

Provide some solid backed up reasons as to how Calzaghe picks up a loss.

Great post, Kris.

People are finding it hard to understand the idea that these 6 of the best would all fall to the same man. But understand it they must.

Bill Gates once divised a mathematic algorithm to determine the factors that could produce a Calzaghe loss. The ****ing computer exploded.

[Chunk..]

Thats a bit insulting.

Could God beat Mikkel Kessler?

He did it once, so he can damn well do it again .

[ИATAS]

Oh, and these fighters have? Dirrel? Ward? Froch? Abraham? I mean I understand Calzaghe has had 46 fights, but Kessler has had over 40, and most could only name one of his opponents, which was Calzaghe. Same case with all these fighters besides maybe Taylor. Dont tyry and rip on Joe when all these contestants suffer the same "problem" as you're making it out to be. And all these fighters in the tournment will also have to fight 4-5 tough fights in a row, why are you acting like Calzaghe is the only one weak to this? So, for example, Froch could fight 4 tough fights in a row in this tourment and make easy pickings with the last fighters, but if Joe was in Frochs spot, he wouldn't last? You have to realize all these fighters are in the same exact position as eachother, but you are revolving around this concept that "Joe has never faught anybody". I know I'm coming off as an *******, which I'm trying not to be, but I'm trying to explain the loose ends in your post.

WTF calm down son. I didn't say Joe wouldn't win the tournament, didn't say joe ******, didn't say **** really except that I don't think joe would go undefeated. None of other guys would go undefeated either so get your granny panties out of your ass crack. Not a fan of any of these guys, just a fan of the tournament in general. There are people in this thread saying Calzaghe would go undefeated, I'm saying no, fucktards, he wouldn't.