Joe Calzaghe's career - is it me or is just highly puzzling?

[Walterson]

Another thing left out of this thread is that in 2002, 2003, 2004 etc., there was not as much of a demand for boxers to fight outside of their country or change weight classes or even to pursue additional alphabet titles. Calzaghe kept his belt and defended it and stayed home and fought....but so did many other "champions" at the time.

Things like Jones going to Australia to fight or Calzaghe coming over to fight Hopkins, or Hatton fighting on US soil or The Super Six etc. wasn't as "in demand". Boxing journalism/TV broadcasts in the United States has become much more "global" in the past four or so years. There were lots of fights that didn't get made because fighters were from different countries, folks weren't as likely to voluntarily relinquish their alphabet titles to go after names, etc.

Jones, Hopkins were fighting strings of nobodies on HBO in showcases and weren't demanded to step up their games either. Calzaghe did the same thing in his own country. As a result, all 3 of their resumes are limited, but it's partly due to the landscape of boxing at the time.

Hey man

I'm gonna have to disagree with your first paragraph. During the early / mid 'noughties' most of the belts were held in America. From, 2001 to 2005 Hopkins held three middleweight belts, whilst from 98 to 2002, RJJ held seven light heavyweight titles. There was no need for them to travel when they held all the belts they needed to in their weight division. Whereas, Joe Calzaghe, held one belt from '97 up until he fought Jeff Lacy in 2005. So, again, I have to fully disagree with you when you say sooo many champions stayed at home and defended their titles. Joe Calzaghe had one title and never sought the others. Why is that?

Roy Jones Jr going to the Australia, to win a cruiserweight title is just as similar to him, moving up in weight to fight Ruiz. I don't understand your points here, because champions have been fighting global for some time now.

Jones and Hopkins were not fighting strings of nobodies. They fought ever 2,3,4,5 person in the top ten of their weight division. Whereas, as I've stated in the main TS, Calzaghe spent the majority of his time fighting people well outside the top ten.

[Walterson]

its interesting when looking at it from that perspective,but lacy and kessler were percieved as bigger threats than any mandatory.those fights were huge and joe performed.he was an underdog against lacy.only mandatory that i see as a great fight woulda been mundine.an sven had a very similar career like joe.his win over hopkins is very underated as hopkins showed us agianst pavlik,he had lots of fight left,and if jones is able to beat danny green,roy would also be a very underated win.joe is definitely an atg.top 20though he's in the bottom 1/2 of it

What makes Joe Calzaghe a top 20 atg can I ask?

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Hopkins fought Hakkar before Calzaghe asked for a fight and instead took on William Joppy who had just won a WBA middleweight title off Howard Eastman.

Joppy was also his mandatory.

Wrong. Hopkins was offered a 3 fight deal by Showtime. His first defence was to be his mandatory against Hakkar. Then he'd fight Harry Simon - another undefeated fighter - and Calzaghe at 168.

He ended up fighting only Hakkar. Oh and Carl Daniels.

[Walterson]

Where did you get your facts from?

Because Hopkins fought Carl Daniels in Feb 2002, then Hakkar in March 03, he was then called about by Calzaghe (after his fight with Mitchell) in June but turned it down after his raised price was refused. He then fought William Joppy in December 2003 for the WBA middleweight title. All these fights were not on Showtime but HBO, your mistaken.

Where is all the 'wrong' info on Hopkins turning down Calzaghe to fight Hakkar coming from?!!!!!

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Where did you get your facts from?

Because Hopkins fought Carl Daniels in Feb 2002, then Hakkar in March 03, he was then called about by Calzaghe (after his fight with Mitchell) in June but turned it down after his raised price was refused. He then fought William Joppy in December 2003 for the WBA middleweight title. All these fights were not on Showtime but HBO, your mistaken.

Where is all the 'wrong' info on Hopkins turning down Calzaghe to fight Hakkar coming from?!!!!!

Ring Magazine. Hopkins had already backed out and doubled his asking price a year before Calzaghe fought Mitchell. Calzaghe kept calling him out.

Yes the fights were on HBO becuase Hopkins turned down the $3m deal from Showtime to fight Calzaghe.

[Walterson]

Wrong. Hopkins was offered a 3 fight deal by Showtime. His first defence was to be his mandatory against Hakkar. Then he'd fight Harry Simon - another undefeated fighter - and Calzaghe at 168.

He ended up fighting only Hakkar. Oh and Carl Daniels.

Where did you get your facts from?

Because Hopkins fought Carl Daniels in Feb 2002, then Hakkar in March 03, he was then called about by Calzaghe (after his fight with Mitchell) in June but turned it down after his raised price was refused. He then fought William Joppy in December 2003 for the WBA middleweight title. All these fights were not on Showtime but HBO, your mistaken.

Also, Joppy was the more appealing fight to Hopkins because at that point who was Joe Calzaghe? William had just defeated Eastman on a Lennox Lewis undercard. At this time too, both Hopkins and Joppy were both promoted by Don King. Hopkins made more money from fighting Joppy, then he would have from fighting an unknown Calzaghe.

Where is all the 'wrong' info on Hopkins turning down Calzaghe to fight Hakkar coming from?!!!!!

[Kunty McPhuck]

I thought it was in 02 when the Calzaghe/B-Hop talks were held

[r.burgundy]

What makes Joe Calzaghe a top 20 atg can I ask?

this is all subjective of course and i as far as him being top 20,i think by todays standards in which guys fight once an twice year,he has clearly been 1 of the best these past 20 years.

to put joe in better perspective,im gonna use b-hop who should be consensous top 20.bernard has not beat 1 other prime,or even great middle weight during his reign.he beat several good/lower tier guys just like joe did through much of his career.both fought 2,prime young,undefeated champions in taylor,and lacy.while i thought hops shoulda got the nod over taylor,he didnt.joe absolutely dominated lacy in a fight in which he was an underdog.so if we agree that up until the point where they fought taylor an lacy that they had similar careers,you should be able to see where im going.joe then fought another prime undefetaed champ in kessler

its not often in anybody boxers career in modern times will 2 prime undefetaed champs go at it in their own weight class and no strings attached.their were tons of guys bernard shoulda fought at 160,but didnt for whatever reason,and i think to often guys are judged on who they didnt fight,rather than who they fought.so judging joe by whom he fought an beat(lacy,kessler,jones,hopkins),next to hops(trinidad,oscar,pavlik,tarver,johnson)consider ing joes biggest wins were against guys his size,while hops was against smaller men,id say he compares very favorably.but joe has easily been 1 of the best fighters of the decade,and if you have a decade of dominance,i think you should be considered atg

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Where did you get your facts from?

Because Hopkins fought Carl Daniels in Feb 2002, then Hakkar in March 03, he was then called about by Calzaghe (after his fight with Mitchell) in June but turned it down after his raised price was refused. He then fought William Joppy in December 2003 for the WBA middleweight title. All these fights were not on Showtime but HBO, your mistaken.

Also, Joppy was the more appealing fight to Hopkins because at that point who was Joe Calzaghe? William had just defeated Eastman on a Lennox Lewis undercard. At this time too, both Hopkins and Joppy were both promoted by Don King. Hopkins made more money from fighting Joppy, then he would have from fighting an unknown Calzaghe.

Where is all the 'wrong' info on Hopkins turning down Calzaghe to fight Hakkar coming from?!!!!!

You just ignored my post and repeated what you said last time.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

I thought it was in 02 when the Calzaghe/B-Hop talks were held

Correct. Unfortunately Walterson refuses to acknowledge that.