who's greater joe calzaghe or winky wright

[deejd]

I don't think Hopkins lost either of those fights to Taylor.

But you're going by official decisions right? For the record, I think Hopkins won the first but the next could have been a toss up/draw. The fights were pretty similar but the first was a Hopkins fight.

Just like it can be argued that Wright could have got the nod against Vargas.

[IronDanHamza]

I don't think Hopkins lost either of those fights to Taylor.

The second Taylor fight was closer than the Vargas-Winky fight.

Can't have both, remember?

[IMDAZED]

I've agreed numerous times that his resume is below that.

I just don't see how it's sigificantly better.

We've gone through two names and if Keith Mullings, a journeyman whose claim to fame is beating a shot Terry Norris, is next up then Calzaghe is just going to keep having the better name line by line. I'm not sure how that is a better win than Richie Woodhall, for goodness sake

[daggum]

no offense but i think we all know calzaghe is much better than winky. the real question is who's better joe calzaghe or chris john? both are a magnificent 46-0. both have beaten all time greats. both came to the united states and left a huge mark. calzaghe might have the slight edge now but john has many more fights left in him.

[IMDAZED]

The second Taylor fight was closer than the Vargas-Winky fight.

Can't have both, remember?

Maybe it was closer. I'd be lying if I said I could remember. But I do remember scoring Vargas-Wright 7-5 for the champion.

[deejd]

Probably.

What's Calzaghes? Jeff Lacy. Hardly any better.

I don't think Winky's resume is rated. Like I said in my first post I think he's argubally not a HOF'er.

I just don't think Calzaghe's resume blows his out the water. Which it hardly does, really.

True indeed.

As far as who's greater from a boxing perspective though, I'd still say Wright's better. We may differ on that, though.

[turbotime]

Great, was he 43 with a 2-2 record in his last four outings?

See what happens when you aren't fighting guys from 140 and 147 anymore?

[IronDanHamza]

We've gone through two names and if Keith Mullings, a journeyman whose claim to fame is beating a shot Terry Norris, is next up then Calzaghe is just going to keep having the better name line by line. I'm not sure how that is a better win than Richie Woodhall, for goodness sake

Richie Woodhall????

Atleast Mullings beat a shot Norris to get his rise to fame.

Woodhall never had a rise to fame Let's not forget that Woodhall was past his best at that point.

Here's the thing, look at the names been brought up outside of Calzaghe's best wins; Shieka, Brewer, Reid and Riche ****ing Woodhall (I literally laughed out loud when Riche get's brought into the converstation) and that is entirely my point.

I have said on so many occasions that I don't think Winky has the better resume. Nor do I think he has a good one.

But, look at their resumes, Calzaghe's is clearly not signifcantly better.

That's the key word. And that's the only problem I've had with your statment this entire thread.

[BoxingGenius27]

Nice to see you fellas have a good debate without the insults and profane language. That's what I like to see.

I'm going to have a drink to that

[£-4-£]

After Mayweather's retirement (after Hatton fight), Calzaghe was considered the P4P number 1 (Ring magazine had him at number 2 behind Pac, but most purists had Calzaghe at number 1). That speaks volumes in itself.

His longevity and overall body of work mean that I'm going with Calzaghe. But Winky was a beast in his prime. Calzaghe is the GOAT SMW and one of the greatest Brits of all time. Winky should get in to the HoF, but I don't think he'd be first ballot, unlike Joe, who is a sure-fire Hall of Famer and ATG.

Calzaghe could probably come out of retirement and beat most Cruiserweights. I don't think Winky will be relevant though when he makes his come-back.