it's not that lacy was terrible it was that he was unproven. he beat 1 guy in the top 10(rated #8) and looked mediocre against guys like vanderpool, wigins, and sheika. there was no reason to consider him as a good fighter. its not like he was golovking who has destroyed 5 top 10 fighters yet calzaghe fans act like calzaghe beating lacy was a great win. it was not. lacy was schooled by jermain taylor lol
Comments Thread For: Joe Calzaghe: Hopkins in a Dangerous, Difficult Fight
Collapse
-
Every time I visit this site I see posts saying exactly the same thing about GGG as you just said about Lacey - he's unproven, he's never beaten an elite level fighter etc, etc.it's not that lacy was terrible it was that he was unproven. he beat 1 guy in the top 10(rated #8) and looked mediocre against guys like vanderpool, wigins, and sheika. there was no reason to consider him as a good fighter. its not like he was golovking who has destroyed 5 top 10 fighters yet calzaghe fans act like calzaghe beating lacy was a great win. it was not. lacy was schooled by jermain taylor lol
I stand by what I said. Until Calzaghe schooled him Lacey was viewed by most boxing pundits the same way GGG is viewed today - unproven, but clearly the best man in his division and feared by the other belt-holders.Last edited by kafkod; 10-31-2014, 09:53 PM.Comment
-
Lacy was over rated and nowhere near the status of Golvkin at the same time , its like Algieri , as soon as he is fighting Manny the pac fans up his rating 10 fold , it was the same with Lacy the Cal fans pump his tyres up , it makes the wins look better , just the way fans of the winner like it .Every time I visit this site I see posts saying exactly the same thing about GGG as you just said about Lacey - he's unproven, he's never beaten an elite level fighter etc, etc.
I stand by what I said. Until Calzaghe schooled him Lacey was viewed by most boxing pundits the same way GGG is viewed today - unproven, but clearly the best man in his division and feared by the other belt-holders.Comment
-
In a fight where hardly anything happens, you have to go with the guy with ring generalship. Hopkins was backed into the ropes all night via Calzaghe's generalship and eventually needed to fake a foul to catch a breather. Hopkins didn't counter the entire fight, he only did so effectively in a couple of rounds.Comment
-
I actually remember quite the opposite. It was Joe's detractors that claimed that he was in over his head against Lacy.Lacy was over rated and nowhere near the status of Golvkin at the same time , its like Algieri , as soon as he is fighting Manny the pac fans up his rating 10 fold , it was the same with Lacy the Cal fans pump his tyres up , it makes the wins look better , just the way fans of the winner like it .Comment
-
-
One will need lots of speed, volume punching, angles and defense in order to defeat Bernard Hopkins. So far no one dimensional fighter with offensive firepower has had any success against him in the past and that list includes: Trinidad, Pavlik and Cloud.
Bernard is very difficult to overwhelm or overpower with power punches because they are easier to defend against because they are coming at him at a much slower pace. His subtle movements and tucked chin makes it extremely hard for punches to land flush on him. Thereby, neutralizing his opponents greatest assets by virtually rendering them impotent against him.
In my judgement, Adonis Stevenson would have been a much better competitor against Hopkins than Kovalev, because he is not only the more technically sound fighter but the more versatile and diverse of the two also.Comment
-
i would think in a fight where hardly anything happens you would go with the guy who is landing punches not missing. everytime hopkins hit the ropes he spun out, countered calzaghe then spun out, or made calzaghe miss and spun out. calzaghe did nothing when hopkins hit the ropes besides miss and get countered of course. simply being on the ropes doesn't mean you are losing. its what happens on the ropes that determines who is winning. if you are staying there and getting hit like floyd-maidana 1 early rounds it's a bad thing. if you are on the ropes and countering/avoiding punches it can be a good thing. once again trying hard is not a scoring criteria landing punches and defense are. ring generalship if you can't pin your man down and keep running into punches? no.In a fight where hardly anything happens, you have to go with the guy with ring generalship. Hopkins was backed into the ropes all night via Calzaghe's generalship and eventually needed to fake a foul to catch a breather. Hopkins didn't counter the entire fight, he only did so effectively in a couple of rounds.Last edited by daggum; 11-01-2014, 02:56 AM.Comment
-
but lacy wasn't even the best in the division though. calzaghe was ranked 1, kessler 2, and lacy 3. stop trying to rewrite history. yes some people overhyped him but he was never good. even if ggg loses his next fight he still is a very good fighter with a solid resume.Every time I visit this site I see posts saying exactly the same thing about GGG as you just said about Lacey - he's unproven, he's never beaten an elite level fighter etc, etc.
I stand by what I said. Until Calzaghe schooled him Lacey was viewed by most boxing pundits the same way GGG is viewed today - unproven, but clearly the best man in his division and feared by the other belt-holders.Comment
Comment