Opinions about Joe Calzaghe

Funny how no one considered Hopkins to be past his prime until he lost to Joe. He was only fighting a couple times a year against Taylor, Tarver, and Winky. Then when he beats Pavlik after losing to Joe he is suddenly "rejuvenated". This is the bias against European fighters.

What? People have been talking about how boring slowed Hopkins fights are for years... He's smart enough to make most fighters fight at his old pace..and at his pace, he wins...

but Cal and Taylor refused to fight at that pace and that is why they won.
 
Next big thing? No way. Everyone was gassing him up and then he lost to some British nobody if I remember right.

I really hope that was tongue in cheek, cos if it isn't, words can't describe just how much you missed the point.
 
Typical Calzaghe basher, just label all his opponents as being past their prime without regard to the fact that some weren't old (Eubanks) and were coming off of their most successful performances (Bhop). Try telling Tarver, Winky, and Pavlik that Bhop was shot when he fought Joe.

Joe's supporters can say the same thing. One of the reasons he slapped so much was because of the numerous hand injuries later in his career. They can easily make the arguement that Joe was "past his prime" when he beat Hopkins and RJJ. And of course why should he have to move up in weight to fight a relative no name like Chad Dawson if he was past his best.

The idea that he "ducked" Dawson is laughable. Put yourself in his place. You're undefeated but injury prone at 36 years old and have just made the two biggest paydays of your career vs Hopkins and Jones. Why would you wanna risk your record and status by moving up in weight to fight a young champion that only hardcore fans are familiar with. He would have made much more money rematching Hopkins.

Btw I don't recall any Americans calling Lacy a bum back in 2006 before Joe humiliated him.

Very good post that, agreed with all of it.
 
Joe was very good, borderline great, but he really should have had some harder fights and gone stateside earlier in his career. However to bash his wins and achievements is ridiculous, as any fighter compiling a record such as Joes deserves props for not slipping up, however weak some of his opponents may appear on paper to his detractors.
 
A lot of great posts in this thread.

My two cents: surefire hall of famer, all time great!
 
He's like the 2nd coming of rocky marciano, only without the exciting style.

Step 1) pad your record by fighting dozens of cans

Step 2) score a couple of victories against ancient former greats

Setp 3) retire undefeated before facing a young, fresh top ranking challenger.
 
no name chad dawson?
lol,you just bashed yourself very much
 
Cal fans view any criticism of him as "hate".. and cop out behind the whole "it's only because he isn't American" bs..

well.. the Klitchkos aren't American.. why do they get so much respect?

Hatton isn't American.. why does he get so much respect?

Lennox Lewis isn't American.. etc etc etc etc


Whether you are American or not, your competition defines you as a fighter. Naz, even though he failed vs. Barrera, gets a certain amount of respect for having the courage to risk his undefeated record vs. a prime all time great opponent.

Cal has nothing on his record that comes close to that. Mikkel Kesslar is his greatest risk, and he gets a lot of respect from me for taking that risk, but like I said before, Cal left a lot of food on his plate. He could have aspired to really test himself.. the opposition was available.. but he didn't want to risk his record.
 
Funny how no one considered Hopkins to be past his prime until he lost to Joe. He was only fighting a couple times a year against Taylor, Tarver, and Winky. Then when he beats Pavlik after losing to Joe he is suddenly "rejuvenated". This is the bias against European fighters.

LMFAO your right NO ONE considered the guy in his mid 40's that lost the middleweight title he held for so long "past his prime." Everybody thought that hopkins was at his best against taylor, and is just not as good of middleweight as taylor is. When the all time middleweight rankings are made--expect to see most experts place taylor's name well above hopkins, as taylor beat him in his prime twice. ;)
 
you mean "bumping to identify myself as a retard" right?

Anyone who thinks Calzaghe had anything to prove by fighting Dawson before the Pascal fight was a fool, anyone that thinks it afterwards............
 
Thomasz Adamek dishagrus with this
 
Anyone who thinks Calzaghe had anything to prove by fighting Dawson before the Pascal fight was a fool, anyone that thinks it afterwards............

I totally agree once you beat a 39 year old Roy Jones there is nothing left to prove
 
Cal fans view any criticism of him as "hate".. and cop out behind the whole "it's only because he isn't American" bs..

well.. the Klitchkos aren't American.. why do they get so much respect?

Hatton isn't American.. why does he get so much respect?

Lennox Lewis isn't American.. etc etc etc etc


Whether you are American or not, your competition defines you as a fighter. Naz, even though he failed vs. Barrera, gets a certain amount of respect for having the courage to risk his undefeated record vs. a prime all time great opponent.

Cal has nothing on his record that comes close to that. Mikkel Kesslar is his greatest risk, and he gets a lot of respect from me for taking that risk, but like I said before, Cal left a lot of food on his plate. He could have aspired to really test himself.. the opposition was available.. but he didn't want to risk his record.

The Klitschkos aren't given the respect they deserve. Their accomplishments are always put In th the shadow of today being "the worst ever era" for HW boxing which is really code for the worst ever era for American HW boxers.

Hatton isn't given that much respect, he is seen as guy who couldn't cut it at the top, even though he beat a HoF legend reigned as the best in his weight class for some time and only came unstuck because he took on two of the greatest ever boxers. The opinion of Hamed is similar.

Lennox was respected at retirement but the respect for him was way over due and based purely on his wins over Americans. Specifically my impression is that the turning point in gaining respect in the US was the Grant fight. Grant is way down the lift of quality opponents lewis beat but he was the closest to a personification of the all American sports hero.


Anyway I think Joe was confident that fights after his retirement would add to his legacy, that neither Pavlik nor Dawson would make it close to being all time greats that he would be criticized for ducking them whilst Kessler would take over SMW and look unbeatable in the post Joe era. 2 out of 3 ain't bad though both Dawson and Kessler could still turn it around.
 
The Klitschkos aren't given the respect they deserve. Their accomplishments are always put In th the shadow of today being "the worst ever era" for HW boxing which is really code for the worst ever era for American HW boxers.

Hatton isn't given that much respect, he is seen as guy who couldn't cut it at the top, even though he beat a HoF legend reigned as the best in his weight class for some time and only came unstuck because he took on two of the greatest ever boxers. The opinion of Hamed is similar.

Lennox was respected at retirement but the respect for him was way over due and based purely on his wins over Americans. Specifically my impression is that the turning point in gaining respect in the US was the Grant fight. Grant is way down the lift of quality opponents lewis beat but he was the closest to a personification of the all American sports hero.


Anyway I think Joe was confident that fights after his retirement would add to his legacy, that neither Pavlik nor Dawson would make it close to being all time greats that he would be criticized for ducking them whilst Kessler would take over SMW and look unbeatable in the post Joe era. 2 out of 3 ain't bad though both Dawson and Kessler could still turn it around.

Sounds like you have an inferiority complex because the US never sold Hatton or Lennox short. Grant wasn't even popular in the US despite the hype put behind him by boxing so I have no idea where that idea came from. I'm guessing you live in Europe and have no concept of how fighters are perceived in the US.

Do you really want to say this isn't the weakest HW division in history? Lets be honest Lennox Lewis was out of shape and a shell of himself when he fought Vitali and he still managed to win that fight. That was the last competitive fighter either one has fought and that was 2003. Is that their fault? No but do you really want to make the argument they are all time greats when their only fight against a HOF is loss.

Calzaghe was protected most of his career and is a HOF with a quality win against Kessler, a meaningless win against a 39 year old Roy Jones, a good win against B-Hop. I find it funny that Europeans are so defensive when Joe's name comes up? Are you really trying to state the guy belongs in the top 10 P4P all time?
 
Back
Top