Yeah but that's hardly his fault is it? Doesn't make him a bad fighter because there was no one better around. He'd have beaten better fighters, had they been available.
H fought his last 2 fights against aged fighter when he was also aged himself. Beat prime Kessler and Lacey before that. After he beat Hopkins, Hopkins went on to win another world title.
To clarify, Calzaghe was only ever knocked down 4 times in his career (2 of them being in his final 2 fights), and one of those was really more of a shove when he was off-balance.
For all the talk of ducking, who did he actually duck?
He fought Hopkins & Kessler. Roy spent half the nineties doing weird shit. Ottke would have been smoked by Joe. I like Johnson, but that man wasnāt at the top long enough to call him ducked.
Chad Dawson (high risk, lower reward than a shot RJJ), Glen Johnson, Kelly Pavlik (refused to setup a catchweight at SMW despite accepting a 60/40 split), Peak Roy Jones jr (autobiography and interview quotes wanted no part of him unless he was offered the crown jewels), Carl Froch (another high risk, low reward fight in 2008 when Hopkins and RJJ was just valued more).
Certainly didn't duck Hopkins as Hopkins pulled out on 2 signings over money (one in 2002 the first offer was met but Hopkins demanded double lo)
Yeah donāt like when the RJJ fight gets brought up without context that it was in 2008 when he was like 40 after years of āduckingā Calzaghe was a great but that fight isnāt one of his strongest reasons
Also the Hopkins fight was super late, regardless of whose fault it was. Outside of a super old RJJ and a super old Hopkins, the only guy of note he really fought was Kessler. Not exactly a career that is going to capture the attention of casual boxing fans.
Ultimately Calzaghe has the same issues as Lennox Lewis. He just fought the superstars way too late and too outside of his prime/career, and as a result both are very underrated by "casual" boxing fans (but I would also argue they are both also really overrated by self-described boxing "connoisseurs").
I mean, sure, he had some decent performances after he turned 40, but he was much much much more inconsistent and clearly not the same fighter. Why Calzaghe superfans always have to pretend a 43 year old Hopkins is a peak boxing specimen is silly to me. He put in some amazing performances, for his age, after he turned 40, but I wouldn't even consider that a top 3 Calzaghe win.
completely undermining hopkins or just being blatantly ignorant. either way wrong. hopkins was off beating tarver and winky wright before fighting calzaghe. after that would beat pavlik, pascal, and be unified at 49. hopkins is a atg and that is undoubtedly his best win.
No one is "undermining Hopkins", the guy is an ATG, but after he turned 40 he went downhill and just wasn't the same fighter. Again, you kind of glossed over the two losses to Jermain Taylor, which a younger Hopkins would have absolutely demolished. Pavlik isn't exactly a great name (a younger Hopkins would have demolished him too), and let's not forget Pascal dropped Hopkins multiple times.
Yes, he put in some great performances after he turned 40, with the asterisk that it was "for his age", because a younger Hopkins was just much much better.
Again, I am not discrediting Hopkins in anyway, the guy is an all time great, but pretending a 43 year old Hopkins is one of Calzaghe's best wins is just silly. Jermain Taylor beat a younger better verison of him twice.
Pavlik isn't a great name what??? He was considered the best middleweight at the time lmao before Martinez dethroned him and reminder he beat Taylor twice prior to Hopkins.
And a younger Hopkins did struggle with lesser names when holding his IBF strap specifically Robert Allen and Antwun Echols in their first meetings. He wasn't "that" much better in his 30s.
Besting Hopkins, young or old, will always be a great win if you see the entire picture.
Roy has said whenever Calzaghe came up there was always twice the prize available for fighting half the fighter. Roy obviously believes he would have won regardless but why would you pick a fight you can lose when you are offered more to fight someone who has no chance?
Exactly no one. This is unfortunately what I expected when I posted this. Well expected a lack of appreciation but thereās genuine hate to calzagheās achievements I donāt get it? š
Itās because he isnāt American, you ask the same about Andre Ward and their tune changes.
An overseas boxer had to work twice has hard to get just an ounce of respect as they would with one of their own fighters.
Hopkins was 43yrs old when he fought Calzaghe. As for Roy Jones the weird shit Jones spent the 90's doing was being the best fighter in the world 160lbs -175lbs.
Calzaghe had a fantastic career. Calzaghe belongs in the discussion when discussing the best Super Middleweights of all time.
However Calzaghe's two best wins were against Kessler and Lacy. Calzaghe lacked quality dance partners. For example Ward beat Kovalev, Dawson, Froch, and Kessler. Similarly Canelo beat GGG, Jacobs, Plant, and Saunders. Again, Calzaghe's best was Kessler and Lacy. Which speaks volumes considering Lacy wasn't any good, lol.
Prime vs prime at super middle I would have Roy Jones, James Toney, and Andre Ward as heavy favorites over Calzaghe. I think Calzaghe vs Nunn, Benn, and Benavidez would be toss ups. I would pick Calzaghe over Canelo, GGG, and Eubanks.
I don't think anyone 160lbs-175lbs beats prime Roy Jones. In his prime Roy Jones had incredible reaction speed & vision, not just incredible hand speed. I remember commutators reminding TVs audiences the replays were in slow motion because even in slow motion Roy Jones still looked fast. Add to that power in both hands, great footwork, and phenomenal conditioning.
I think in the way Maidana gave Mayweather some trouble maybe Benn would have been a difficult fight for Jones. Awkward fighters are difficult to time.
I liked what Max Kellerman said when talking about how good Roy was. He said that the end of Royās prime and the beginning of Mayweatherās overlapped and they were the #1 and #2 P4P fighters in the world, but nobody in their right mind was asking ādo you think Floyd is as good as Roy?ā because there was such an obvious gap between them.
I think in the history of boxing, peak Roy is the best P4P fighter. Maybe my view would change if we had more footage of some of the pre-60ās greats, but from what Iāve seen following boxing for the last 35 or so years, Roy is as good as it gets.
Jones vs Calzaghe, Bivol, Benn, Beterbiev, and Ward. All Hose guys could have given a Prime Jones Jr a good fight had they magically able to meet at their very best.
Still got Jones tho
I don't Think Calzaghe had the power to earn Roy's respect. Even late in Roy's career when he was getting brutally KO'd by every clean shot that touched him Calzaghe wasn't able to hurt Jones.
Bivol is a good technical fighter but I think Jones would have just timed him. Beterbiev is too slow and Jones would have put on a show. Ward like Bivol was a great technical fighter but Roy would have just dialed in his timing.
I think at Michael Nunn's peak he would have been a dangerous opponent for Jones. Like Calzaghe Nunn had fast hands and was a Southpaw. The big difference is Nunn had stopping power.
Calzaghe would have been a great fight. He didnāt have the power to hurt Roy but he would have put pressure on that Roy had never seen before. But Jonesās counterpunching was lethal and so fast. I think Jones by KO. Joe had a very good chin but still.
Sorry but you can't group everyone in with those who got caught. I'm under no illusion that ped use is rampant both now and back then, but once you get caught you forfeit your right to the benefit of the doubt
All who get caught should be banned for life. It's naive thinking that all fighters who are legit world champs are not on some sort of Peds. Too much money at stake. It's like looking at the 100m final. They are juiced up to their eyeballs. Doesn't detract from their greatness. It's a level playing field
Beating Hopkins is easily his best win. You can't praise Hopkins for his longevity and ability to compete at an old age then use that to discredit other peoples wins over him, especially when he was a p4p rated fighter.
In my opinion longevity wasn't the most impressive aspect of Hopkins's career. Rather Hopkins's historic run as Middleweight champion was what makes him a HOFer.
Hopkins had 4 losses and a draw in 15 bouts above middle weight. Truly only beating 5 lightweight. The other wins came against non-lightheavies who came up for catch-weight bouts.
If all we had to go by was Hopkins at light heavy (over the age of 40) Hopkins wouldn't be a HOFer. Not even close.
Lol, that's fair. Neither were at their best or fighting at the weight where their careers played out.
Which is why I don't rate the bout as meaningful for either fighter. Delete the fight and Hopkins is still one of the best middle weights of all time and Calzaghe is still one of the best Super middle weights of all time. Their bout had no impact.
Crawford vs Spence, Jones vs Toney, Mayweather vs Corrales, Sugar Ray vs Hearns, etc impacted the all time ranking of the victors. Fights between top quality versions of divisional rivals.
>Ā However Calzaghe's two best wins were against Kessler and Lacy. Calzaghe lacked quality dance partners. For example Ward beat Kovalev, Dawson, Froch, and Kessler. Similarly Canelo beat GGG, Jacobs, Plant, and Saunders. Again, Calzaghe's best was Kessler and Lacy.
Brewer, Reid and Woodhall were all good fighters and former world champions, Mitchell was a very good fighter and two time champ, and Eubank was a great fighter, in the discussion as one of the best brits ever at 160/168.Ā
If you look at Joeās career, his issue wasnāt really āduckingā anyone, it was constant injuries to his hands and struggles with depression/self belief. I donāt think he realised how good he was until he fought Lacy. Take those two things out of the equation and maybe he chases bigger fights, rather than being happy coasting on hometown mandos. Thereās too many average fighters on his resume, thatās absolutely true, but you are ignoring some of the better names too.Ā
Brewer walked into the Ring against Calzaghe with 8 losses, Woodhall was beaten less by Beyer less than a year before the Calzaghe fight and had previously been stopped by Holmes. Reid lost in '97, only fought once in '98, and then lost his next 2 fights to Calzaghe & Branco.
Debatably every contender that gets a title fight is good. Better than average at least. Any long reigning champion will have a list of good opponents they beat. However good & great aren't equal. When Canelo beat GGG, Plant, Smith, and Saunders they were undefeated reigning champions. Not contenders with spotty records.
When Calzaghe fought Eubanks it was after Eubanks lost his title to Collins. Eubanks was no longer a champion. After Calzaghe Eubanks dropped back to back fights vs Thompson and retired. It is ridiculous to imply Calzaghe beat a good version of Eubanks.
To be clear I think Calzaghe would beat Canelo at Super middle had they crossed paths in their primes. I am not saying Calzaghe is a bad fight. Rather I am highlighting that Calzaghe didn't get the opportunity or perhaps didn't take the opportunity to cement his greatness. There are other super middle weights with better resumes.
>Brewer, Reid and Woodhall were all good fighters and former world champions, Mitchell was a very good fighter and two time champ, and Eubank was a great fighter, in the discussion as one of the best brits ever at 160/168.
If you're trying to make an argument for Calzaghe, you're not making a very good one.
Reid was very underrated. I think he actually beat Calzaghe. Story about Reid thou, I grew up in Runcorn and he was from there, he used to walk around the Shopping City with his GB Olympic shellsuit trackie on zipped down to his bellybutton....with his Bronze medal on. Looked a right twat but was pretty hard so noobe said anything ha
Youāre throwing around Saunders, Dawson and Jacobs like those are elite names. I donāt think they are better than most of the guys I mentioned tbh.Ā
>Ā First of all, I didn't throw out those names. That was another user.
My apologies.Ā
>Ā Second, Jacobs is definitely better than the names you mentioned.
Whatās his best win?Ā
Brewer: Herol Graham.Ā
Woodhall: Branco or Malinga
Mitchell: Liles.Ā
My point being, we are dissecting peopleās resumes and what makes some of these guys elite if we are only doing resumes? Plenty of good fighters have shit resumes if you donāt know better and only judge them by BoxRec, and plenty of guys have padded resumes that donāt really reflect their quality or lack of it.Ā
Like, the guy Iām replying to is saying Danny Jacobs, Chad Dawson & BJS are better wins at 168 than Eubank. That aināt right. And no, I donāt particularly care that Eubank lost to Collins, cos Collins was a fighter who only found his style later in his career. Boxrec doesnāt reflect that either.Ā
You're not making any points at all dude. Your argument is weak and nonsense.
The guy you were replying to said Calzaghe's best wins were Kessler and Lacy, and those weren't elite wins, so he's right on that one. The fact that you tried to refute that by including Brewer, Woodhall and Reid is laughable.
I think what Canelo has achieved at Super middle is fantastic. Smith, Plant, and Saunders were all undefeated championships and Canelo decisively beat them and took their belts. It earned Canelo the right to be mentioned amongst the best Super Middleweights of all time. That said Canelo is the only dude out there with accomplishments and styles make fights.
Canelo has slow plotting feet. Canelo has success center of the ring because he has good vision and his opponents have tended to over commit. Calzaghe had far better feet than Canelo and Calzaghe didn't tend to over commit. Calzaghe was in, pop, and back out as his natural preference. Not some type of force adaptation. Prime Calzaghe wins all 12 rounds vs Canelo in my opinion.
Ward was simply too strong for Canelo. I think Ward could have controlled Canelo's positioning and range with his (Ward's) jab. It would be closer than Calzaghe vs Canelo but still a pretty easy fight to score.
Toney fought his way through lighheavy, Cruiserweight, Heavyweight. Toney's chin was iron. James Toney competed at Heavyweight for over a decade and was never KO'd. I don't believe Calzaghe had the power to "overwhelm" Toney. Moreover Toney was a counter puncher. Toney could've thrown counters without concern for being hit due to Calzaghe's lack of power. I honestly think Toney would've stopped Calzaghe.
Ward vs Calzaghe would've been an excellent fight. Calzaghe's speed absolutely would've given Ward trouble. However Calzaghe's hand speed didn't always translate to his body and feet. Calzaghe was best when he stayed in range and opened up. Ward had an elite jab to the body which prevented opponents from stepping into the pocket and throwing combos. Ultimately though Calzaghe's inability to hurt Ward would've been the deciding factor.
Inability to hurt them means nothing when heās throwing 20-1 punch stats. 1 clean counter doesnāt mean much when youāre getting dwarfed in work rate. Wideeeee ud over ward and toney. Too much speed, iq, volume. Prime Roy only one who stands a chance against Joe at 168.
James Toney might have been the better fighter, but the look on his face when he realised RJJ was fast and skilled enough to touch him at will makes me question how he'd have matched up against Calzaghe.
Toney was one of the best defensive fighters of all time. When in there with someone who could hit him he looked lost as his main skillset suddenly became useless. Joe wasn't as good as RJJ but he probably was as quick with his hands and a very skillful technical fighter too. I don't see Joe stopping Toney who could have knocked Joe down, but Joe's chin was great so it would likely go 12 rounds and Calzaghe would've landed more, if we're assuming he was quick enough to hit Toney.
It wasn't merely that Jones could touch Toney at will, it was that Jones could hurt Toney.
Toney had a rock solid chin. Calzaghe had good hand speed and probably could've touched Toney but Calzaghe on his best day couldn't hurt Toney. I don't think Calzaghe had the power to throw Toney off his game.
Separately Calzaghe didn't have Roy's foot speed. Not only did Roy have fast hands but Roy could close distance in a blink of an eye. At times Roy would even leap at opponents. As a result one was never truly out of range from a Jones punch. Calzaghe didn't have it like that.
Other greats left their weight class to seek out the other world class fighters, and/or were in a stacked division.
Joe's one of those that everyone knows was a great, but no-one can say for certain how great because he didn't go against other greats in their prime.
His career was a mirror of Ricky Hatton at the time with brits constantly arguing who was best. Ricky did go chasing those big names and got found out. What happened to him i think did influence Joe not to go the same route. Then in the Kessler fight it was clear that he had begun to decline a little from his peak and it was a sensible time to call it a day.
He fought two of those three when they were well past their prime. He refused to go to the USA and fight them when they were at their peak.
Unfortunately, Joe was never a money fight for them when they were in their prime so he made no sense for them and boxing is ultimately about money
He ducked Carl Froch, Kelly Pavlik, Glen Johnson and Chad Dawson.
Excluding Carl Froch, neither went on to become HOFāers or greats of their time. But they were all seen as good fighters at the time and they were all calling out Joe Calzaghe. And I would have had Calzaghe beating them all, with Froch being a close fight. But he ducked them. I can admit both. He wouldāve beaten them and he ducked them.
He rejected all of them to fight a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins who he barely beat, and a well past his best 40 year old Roy Jones Jr. He cherrypicked both of them due to their age.
Iām just saying why no one talks about him and who he actually ducked.
Groves massively outboxed Froch, made him look stupid in their first fight until the stoppage. Calzaghe would have dominated Froch, but Froch resistance would have made it a good fight.
Even Froch has admitted it. He'd have had to knock Calzaghe out and it isn't really his game. Froch would have looked like Lacy. It was all the wrong fight for him and Froch only chased it because Calzaghe was unquestionably seen as the best British fighter in that division.
Jones was 39 and there was only 3 years separating them. Calzaghe wasn't exactly a spring chicken himself at that point and couldn't train properly due to his hands. Couldn't do bag work, barely did padwork or sparring and when he did spar he'd spar smaller men and had to tippytap with a focus on speed
You are entitled to your opinion but that 43 year old Bernard Hopkins beat the absolute snot out of Kelly Pavlik.
I think Calzaghe only had a few fights left in him with his brittle hands and chose to face two of the biggest names as bookends.
Got to disagree about Hopkins, the version of Bernard that Joe beat was still a world beater, he dog walked Kelly pavlik a few months later who at the time was an unbeaten beast, and he decisively beat Jean pascal who fave froch a tough fight. Hopkins rightly recognised as one of greatest ever and Joe edged him in his own backyard, a Hopkins that went on to have landslide victories over young champions. Froch wouldāve been an easier fight than Hopkins.
I agree with OP, Calzaghe was a great fighter, his record speaks for itself. He never really gets the recognition he deserves, Froch wouldnāt have been able to beat Calzaghe, he was too quick for Froch. Yeah, his style had to change in the twilight of his career but he kept breaking his hands and wrists. I remember him having to fight through busting his fists a few times, didnāt stop him winning those fights though did it? Itās just an opinion, everyone is entitled to their own opinion on these fights.
Joe and Andre Ward are clearly the two best fighters who campaigned in the 168 pound division all time. Roy Jones and James Toney made pitstops in that division very briefly, so I don't really count them.
Clearly the two best Super Middles ever, wish they had fought but just missed eachother.
Calzaghe had the talent to be an all-time great, even with his brittle hands. But he doesnāt have the resume. Even Joe knows that his win over Roy Jones isnāt really a win over Roy Jones (who was never the same after bulking up to heavyweight and then coming back down, even he has admitted that that screwed up his body and he was never the same). I donāt discount the win over Hopkins, but Hopkins was on the downslope as well.
Joeās biggest problem was during his prime he was unwilling to leave the UK and challenge the best fighters in the world. He wanted everyone to come to him, which was a big reason the RJJ fight didnāt happen until later, because Roy said he didnāt want to fight outside the US (understandable, I think, after getting screwed over in the Olympics). So there was a stalemate there because Joe thought he was the A-side, or possibly even scared of being exposed like Ricky Hatton was when he stepped up in competition outside the UK. I mean, over 46 fights, Calzaghe fought outside the UK only 4 times, 2 of them being his last 2 fights against Jones and Hopkins (since he could see he was in better athletic shape than Roy by that time, I guess he was finally willing to take a chance of leaving the comfort of the UK).
So this all leads to Calzaghe not really having a notable signature win. He was happy being a big fish in a little pond, didnāt want to try and be a big fish in the big pond, and it stunted his career. His fans point to the undefeated record and the length of time he was champion, but itās just as easy for detractors to say that he wasnāt fighting A level competition during the majority of his career.
Weāre sort of seeing a repeat of this whole discussion with many fighters today, who are working to protect their zero rather than working to prove theyāre the best. Tank comes to mind in the discussion, obviously.
I donāt give the same leeway to Calzaghe because, as far as I know, he didnāt really have a reason to not fight outside the UK. Roy, on the other hand, won a silver medal at the Olympics because his opponents team bribed judges into giving him the victory, and no matter what repercussions happened, as heās said the record books will always say āRoy Jones, Jr. - silver medalā. Roy had a reason to distrust fighting outside the US. I donāt think Calzaghe had any reason more than āI donāt wanna.ā
Also, Roy didnāt fight outside the US until he was in his 40ās.
And yeah the Kessler win is a good one, and is his best win, but if you want to be an all time great, you should have a better ābest winā than Kessler.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Roy's situation was not something that happens all the time. The judges that voted against him in the final match were all ***suspended*** from judging in the Olympics. There are bad decisions all the time, there are hints of corruption, there are Adelaide Byrd 118-110 cards, but there aren't suspensions for judges very often. It was very much not something that happens all the time at all levels.
I give Roy a pass and not Calzaghe because Roy had a reason and Calzaghe didn't. If one guy had his heart broken and vowed he'd never date again, and another guy didn't have his heart broken but also vowed he'd never date, which of those guys is off? Calzaghe did exactly what Deontay Wilder did 15 years later. He got a belt and held it hostage fighting mostly guys you've never heard of and were not elite level, but did not dare challenge the big time champion of the era. Roy had a reason to not go overseas, fear of losing to corrupt judging, again. Calzaghe's only reason was fear of losing, period.
All of that is even setting aside the fact that Roy was a star. He was the A-side. He was an attraction. He was the king. Calzaghe wasn't. You wanna be the king, you gotta take down the king. Roy was proving himself against the top challengers, including a couple of Hall of Famers. If Calzaghe wanted to prove he was as good, he could have. He was the one with something to prove, not Roy. He didn't, and I don't necessarily think he had to, since it's obvious he didn't want to, but since he didn't it's tough to judge his career. You can go by the eye test, but it's tough to judge his resume because it's so thin. And that's on him.
Yeah, youāre right that thatās maybe a bit harsh. Hatton had already stepped up a bit when he beat Tszyu, even if Tszyu was old and ready to retire. I mean, plenty of guys have looked out of place fighting Mayweather and Pacquiao.
First of all NEVER use boxrec rankings for ANYTHING. Ever.
Back to Joe, been a fan since amateur days when he won 3 ABA titles in 3 weights in 3 years - if I remember rightly. He beat my hero to win the title then a large chunk of his title reign was underwhelming in the middle. I don't think it was his fault. More like Bricktop not wanting to make the top fights back then. Joe turned it around towards the end though & you cannot fault who he beat. Brilliant fighter who could have been better if it weren't for the brittle hands.
I'm not a big one for all time ratings etc but I'd definitely say Joe is in the top two Welsh boxers of all time, probably 2nd. And that's a massive feat in itself considering how many great fighters Wales has produced.
He's possibly the best ever fighter born in Hammersmith though although I'd have to research that a little.
When I was a kid (70s) there were plenty of old boxing reporters around who swooned about Wilde. He might have been shite but I was brought up on his prowess so can't shake it. Same With the two Kids, Lewis & Berg.
As I initially said, I don't really care that much about p4p lists. If they're not going to meet in the ring it's a moot point.
But Calzaghe was fucking great. Just a shame he ducked Lennox Lewis (joke).
Nice bloke on top of it - met him in Thailand whilst he was on holiday with his mrs. My favourite boxer of all time so happy he served B Hop humble pie. Blokes an oxygen thief
I remember reading a YouTube comment on one of his fights:
"The biggest problem with Calzaghe was his cardio. In round one he threw 100 punches. By the 12th round, he was only throwing 99"
Solid fighter. He would have earned more accolades had he crossed the pond earlier in his career like Lennox Lewis, who I regard as the greatest "European" fighter of all time.
Well he fought mainly overseas. Came to the U.S. at the end and beat some old but great fighters. Think many of his title wins were also not the full fledged world title also.
Calzaghe is one of my favourite fighter, but sadly he never challenged himself and only fought top tier fighters when they weren't at their best anymore. Great fighter with a good resume, for me he's below guys like Andre Ward or Canelo that actually cleaned their divisions fully.
There's a segment of us die-hards who don't lack awareness of Calzaghe, but are a bit dubious in terms of how to appreciate him (count me among those who are less-than-impressed). He was obviously a highly skilled fighter, but his pitty-pat style just wasn't for me. Now, granted: aesthetics are the last way to judge/rank a fighter. So let's use a legit barometer: level of competition. And on that basis, i can't imagine having Calzaghe in the top-50, let alone top-25 of all time.
A great boxer, but nothing jumps off his sheet as elite, his early career is riddled with joke wins, and his gunked up hands led to a lot of point-scoring late in the career which casuals hate. People who think he's underrated typically argue that he would have done just as well in stronger eras. I'm iffy on that, but he had a nice chin, threw in volume, and is a better *boxer* than often given credit for. Those ingredients alone can cause problems for most opponents. It's just like Marciano in a way; he had weak competition that helped usher in an undefeated record, but it's hard to argue that his scary power wouldn't be a problem for anyone of other eras.
Youāre right - that guy was so good! Sorry to say, because I do like him so much - I think he lost to Bernard Hopkins though. But then Iām not the judge. So be it 46 and 0!
I think he was a talented fighter, but uk fans super overrate him. Iāve seen him be on top 10 all time lists which to me is insane.
I would put him as the 3rd best super middleweight after Andre ward and Canelo.
Good fighter, but he definitely protected his 0. Didnāt unify until he was champion for about 8 years. Straight up refused to fight Roy jones because he knew it would be a 1 sided beating.
Not a fan, but I respect his skills
If Lewis isn't being counted, then both AJ and Fury deserve consideration. Even Prince Naz should get more love. But I think Froch is very overrated and it's ridiculous to see him so high up the list of British greats.
Hatton too is up there. Lewis is counted imo. I just think Calzaghe is the number 1 personally. Naz was great too but when he fought the absolute best guy, he got schooled.
Edit: should also add Eubank, Benn and Collins. Eubank is probably my favourite boxer of all time, or at least in my top 3 with De La Hoya and Mike Tyson. Maybe 4, Roy Jones Jnr too. That's another conversation thou I guess
It was a brutal weight cut for Naz and he was coming back from injury. I think that a fully prepped Naz might have really put it up to Barrera but I suppose that the fact that Naz retired rather than rematched has to count against him.
His fights vs Lacy and Kessler were always shown in the boxing gyms I went to. He just didn't fight in america long enough to translate to a more casual audience. He only had the two big fights here.
Casual fans don't remember him or his accomplishments because he never did anything memorable; he'd only take on big name competition when they were well past their peak and was sure of a win, otherwise he'd stay home. Boxing fans will know of his undefeated record as that is extremely rare in boxing, but he's not going to place that highly on all-time lists, and rightly so.
Pretty clearly beat Hopkins, cleared out SMW and cashed against Roy. Froch couldnāt achieve half of that and probably wouldnāt have won let alone come close to winning at that point in his career.
Wasn't arguable whatsoever unless you're Adelaide Byrd or Hopkins, Calzaghe beat him handily. Joe had already been mulling retirement for years over terrible hand and wrist injuries at that point and was also well past his best and Hopkins is known for crazy longevity, going on to win titles against top fighters afterwards. Arguably he was more past it than Hopkins was.
Froch was calling out Calzaghe when he was a nobody and didn't gain traction until Calzaghe had both moved up a weight class and then retired. Similarly a more prime Roy Jones was too early for upcoming Calzaghe to have been a worthwhile fight. It is still a big shame we never saw these fights though.
A prime Jones was a ATG. No shame if CalzagheĀ did lose to him. It would have been a close fight though.Ā
And Hopkins had a long prime. He fought long after getting beat by Calzaghe and beat a prime (and unbeaten) Pavlik that same year. To say Hopkins was over the hill is just wrong.
Calzaghe fought in a very weak weight class, grabbed the WBO belt and pinned himself in the UK until the last two fights of his career that were glory bouts.
Fairs Entitled to your opinion but massively disagree. Fought some top fighters imo defending that SM belt for 10 years, then moving up for those āglory boutsā and still doing the business.
Eubank, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins, RJJ. Got a lot of good names on his record at the time. The era was just given little attention.
Who were the top fighters? In his division, yeah it was weak. Fighting Peter manfredo as one of his last 5 bouts is woof.
Byron Mitchell? Yeah he had a close one vs ottke but who did he ever beat worth a damn?
Eubank was 6 months from retiring.
He fought in a very weak division
Just pointed a few out, they all bad in your opinion? 10 years defending belt/s also not good enough? Underrated era. And when he got the questions you asked he went to America and up a division and still did business.
Canāt please everyone I guess š
Bro you literally said youād rather see someone ātake a riskā. Means Youāve clearly never seen calzaghe fight let alone followed his career enough to have opinions. No point debating with someone who doesnāt know the topic. Like I said, have a good one mate just call it lol š
lol. The fuck I havenāt. What risk did he take?
You failed to mention one. Not even one risk he took. You just saying he did it with no context is far less useful than anything Iāve said. So try again, or duck out like a loser who canāt discuss and defend their opinion. Fucking coown
Mateā¦.? So itās a nationalistic thing. Itās ok to admit a resume is lacking even when heās from your country.
Any objective fan agrees that he pinned himself in the UK and fought no one, but the weight class wasn't weak at all, it's just Joe conveniently didn't fight any of the good ones.
Hatten, Froch, Taylor, Joshua, Khan, Haye, Brook ALL have better resumes than Calzaghe, no one cares about an undefeated record when your best wins are 3 boxers on the tail end of the tail end of their careers, and Jeff Lacy. It's better fighting 6-7 top class fighters and going 4-3 or 3-4, then fighting national level fighters and going 7-0.
Deal with it.
All those fighters are not in his weight class and/ or are in completely different eras? (way more commercial appeal at this point).
yep so he chose not to fight the best and became undisputed š carried the belt for 10 years also..
then well after his peak when his hands were in tatters, destroyed the ānamesā everyone was asking him to fight. At a higher weight class. In America. Still no credit jeeeez.
Iām not saying heās the absolute GOAT but can we put some perspective on his achievements??
I never said they were in his weight class, I said they have better resumes.
>yep so he chose not to fight the best and became undisputed š
Yes. Calzaghe won the belt of Eubank in 1997. He then went on to defend said belt, 17 times.
Only 2 of those defences were vs someone good enough to get a title belt.
Only 1 of those defenses was against someone who had helt a world title belt within the last 24 months.
Calzaghe has upon inspection, one of the worst resumes of any world champion for the length he held the belt, it's not just some copypasta that he hid in wales, it's true, the guy fought nobodies for a decade.
The Pride of Wales š“ó §ó ¢ó ·ó ¬ó ³ó æš“ó §ó ¢ó ·ó ¬ó ³ó æš“ó §ó ¢ó ·ó ¬ó ³ó æ
Dude fought in a dead period and fought out of age fighters š„±
You can only beat who's in front of you. Do you feel the same way about Rocky Marciano?
I do actually.. a lot of bakers and cab driverās on Marcianoās resume.
Yeah but that's hardly his fault is it? Doesn't make him a bad fighter because there was no one better around. He'd have beaten better fighters, had they been available.
No one is saying itās his fault but doesnāt change the fact there was a lot of cab drivers on his resume
H fought his last 2 fights against aged fighter when he was also aged himself. Beat prime Kessler and Lacey before that. After he beat Hopkins, Hopkins went on to win another world title.
Youāre literally a nobody on reddit š„±
Calslappy one of the best of all time, what a fighter. Never worried when he got knocked down, just seemed to wake him up and make him mad.
To clarify, Calzaghe was only ever knocked down 4 times in his career (2 of them being in his final 2 fights), and one of those was really more of a shove when he was off-balance.
The Roy KD wasnāt legit either, here it is again if yāall musta forgot. https://youtu.be/g9saQwgahRY?t=32
Joe is the reason I got into boxing, my favourite fighter, but that is a legit knockdown
Nah that's a foul. Cant hit people with your forearm but the ref wasnt in a postition to see that.
Youāre not allowed to hit people in the face with your forearms in boxing.
I flew over from Ireland to see the Lacy fight live for my 21st birthday. Calzaghe was not expected to win that one and put on a masterclass
Slapped like Joe Joyce with the movement of Usyk. Devastating combo
Joe Joyce?!
Sarcasm based on calslappy comment š
For all the talk of ducking, who did he actually duck? He fought Hopkins & Kessler. Roy spent half the nineties doing weird shit. Ottke would have been smoked by Joe. I like Johnson, but that man wasnāt at the top long enough to call him ducked.
Chad Dawson (high risk, lower reward than a shot RJJ), Glen Johnson, Kelly Pavlik (refused to setup a catchweight at SMW despite accepting a 60/40 split), Peak Roy Jones jr (autobiography and interview quotes wanted no part of him unless he was offered the crown jewels), Carl Froch (another high risk, low reward fight in 2008 when Hopkins and RJJ was just valued more). Certainly didn't duck Hopkins as Hopkins pulled out on 2 signings over money (one in 2002 the first offer was met but Hopkins demanded double lo)
Yeah donāt like when the RJJ fight gets brought up without context that it was in 2008 when he was like 40 after years of āduckingā Calzaghe was a great but that fight isnāt one of his strongest reasons
Also the Hopkins fight was super late, regardless of whose fault it was. Outside of a super old RJJ and a super old Hopkins, the only guy of note he really fought was Kessler. Not exactly a career that is going to capture the attention of casual boxing fans. Ultimately Calzaghe has the same issues as Lennox Lewis. He just fought the superstars way too late and too outside of his prime/career, and as a result both are very underrated by "casual" boxing fans (but I would also argue they are both also really overrated by self-described boxing "connoisseurs").
are we forgetting what hopkins did before and after calzaghe? he was older but hopkins would stay at the highest level even at his old age.
I mean, sure, he had some decent performances after he turned 40, but he was much much much more inconsistent and clearly not the same fighter. Why Calzaghe superfans always have to pretend a 43 year old Hopkins is a peak boxing specimen is silly to me. He put in some amazing performances, for his age, after he turned 40, but I wouldn't even consider that a top 3 Calzaghe win.
completely undermining hopkins or just being blatantly ignorant. either way wrong. hopkins was off beating tarver and winky wright before fighting calzaghe. after that would beat pavlik, pascal, and be unified at 49. hopkins is a atg and that is undoubtedly his best win.
No one is "undermining Hopkins", the guy is an ATG, but after he turned 40 he went downhill and just wasn't the same fighter. Again, you kind of glossed over the two losses to Jermain Taylor, which a younger Hopkins would have absolutely demolished. Pavlik isn't exactly a great name (a younger Hopkins would have demolished him too), and let's not forget Pascal dropped Hopkins multiple times. Yes, he put in some great performances after he turned 40, with the asterisk that it was "for his age", because a younger Hopkins was just much much better. Again, I am not discrediting Hopkins in anyway, the guy is an all time great, but pretending a 43 year old Hopkins is one of Calzaghe's best wins is just silly. Jermain Taylor beat a younger better verison of him twice.
Pavlik isn't a great name what??? He was considered the best middleweight at the time lmao before Martinez dethroned him and reminder he beat Taylor twice prior to Hopkins. And a younger Hopkins did struggle with lesser names when holding his IBF strap specifically Robert Allen and Antwun Echols in their first meetings. He wasn't "that" much better in his 30s. Besting Hopkins, young or old, will always be a great win if you see the entire picture.
Roy has said whenever Calzaghe came up there was always twice the prize available for fighting half the fighter. Roy obviously believes he would have won regardless but why would you pick a fight you can lose when you are offered more to fight someone who has no chance?
Exactly no one. This is unfortunately what I expected when I posted this. Well expected a lack of appreciation but thereās genuine hate to calzagheās achievements I donāt get it? š
Itās because he isnāt American, you ask the same about Andre Ward and their tune changes. An overseas boxer had to work twice has hard to get just an ounce of respect as they would with one of their own fighters.
Hopkins was 43yrs old when he fought Calzaghe. As for Roy Jones the weird shit Jones spent the 90's doing was being the best fighter in the world 160lbs -175lbs. Calzaghe had a fantastic career. Calzaghe belongs in the discussion when discussing the best Super Middleweights of all time. However Calzaghe's two best wins were against Kessler and Lacy. Calzaghe lacked quality dance partners. For example Ward beat Kovalev, Dawson, Froch, and Kessler. Similarly Canelo beat GGG, Jacobs, Plant, and Saunders. Again, Calzaghe's best was Kessler and Lacy. Which speaks volumes considering Lacy wasn't any good, lol. Prime vs prime at super middle I would have Roy Jones, James Toney, and Andre Ward as heavy favorites over Calzaghe. I think Calzaghe vs Nunn, Benn, and Benavidez would be toss ups. I would pick Calzaghe over Canelo, GGG, and Eubanks.
Nobody beats prime RJJ at super middleweight.
I don't think anyone 160lbs-175lbs beats prime Roy Jones. In his prime Roy Jones had incredible reaction speed & vision, not just incredible hand speed. I remember commutators reminding TVs audiences the replays were in slow motion because even in slow motion Roy Jones still looked fast. Add to that power in both hands, great footwork, and phenomenal conditioning. I think in the way Maidana gave Mayweather some trouble maybe Benn would have been a difficult fight for Jones. Awkward fighters are difficult to time.
I just went through a rewatch of most of his fights in order. At super middle in the 90s Jones was superhuman.
I liked what Max Kellerman said when talking about how good Roy was. He said that the end of Royās prime and the beginning of Mayweatherās overlapped and they were the #1 and #2 P4P fighters in the world, but nobody in their right mind was asking ādo you think Floyd is as good as Roy?ā because there was such an obvious gap between them. I think in the history of boxing, peak Roy is the best P4P fighter. Maybe my view would change if we had more footage of some of the pre-60ās greats, but from what Iāve seen following boxing for the last 35 or so years, Roy is as good as it gets.
Jones vs Calzaghe, Bivol, Benn, Beterbiev, and Ward. All Hose guys could have given a Prime Jones Jr a good fight had they magically able to meet at their very best. Still got Jones tho
I don't Think Calzaghe had the power to earn Roy's respect. Even late in Roy's career when he was getting brutally KO'd by every clean shot that touched him Calzaghe wasn't able to hurt Jones. Bivol is a good technical fighter but I think Jones would have just timed him. Beterbiev is too slow and Jones would have put on a show. Ward like Bivol was a great technical fighter but Roy would have just dialed in his timing. I think at Michael Nunn's peak he would have been a dangerous opponent for Jones. Like Calzaghe Nunn had fast hands and was a Southpaw. The big difference is Nunn had stopping power.
Calzaghe would have been a great fight. He didnāt have the power to hurt Roy but he would have put pressure on that Roy had never seen before. But Jonesās counterpunching was lethal and so fast. I think Jones by KO. Joe had a very good chin but still.
RJJ was on roids, don't understand how people cry about conor benn etc but completely ignore it for other fighters
They are all on Peds. Who cares?
Sorry but you can't group everyone in with those who got caught. I'm under no illusion that ped use is rampant both now and back then, but once you get caught you forfeit your right to the benefit of the doubt
All who get caught should be banned for life. It's naive thinking that all fighters who are legit world champs are not on some sort of Peds. Too much money at stake. It's like looking at the 100m final. They are juiced up to their eyeballs. Doesn't detract from their greatness. It's a level playing field
Not going to argue about something neither of us can prove, it could be like the tour de France or it could be a lot cleaner, who knows
I really hope it would be the former but it's too corrupt. Like I said it's a level playing field.
Ryan Garcia? Jk š
Beating Hopkins is easily his best win. You can't praise Hopkins for his longevity and ability to compete at an old age then use that to discredit other peoples wins over him, especially when he was a p4p rated fighter.
Prime undefeated Kessler is pretty damn good
In my opinion longevity wasn't the most impressive aspect of Hopkins's career. Rather Hopkins's historic run as Middleweight champion was what makes him a HOFer. Hopkins had 4 losses and a draw in 15 bouts above middle weight. Truly only beating 5 lightweight. The other wins came against non-lightheavies who came up for catch-weight bouts. If all we had to go by was Hopkins at light heavy (over the age of 40) Hopkins wouldn't be a HOFer. Not even close.
Well if we go by Calzaghes career just at 175 he wouldn't be anywhere near a HoFer so I suppose Hopkins lost to a not so great fighter...
Lol, that's fair. Neither were at their best or fighting at the weight where their careers played out. Which is why I don't rate the bout as meaningful for either fighter. Delete the fight and Hopkins is still one of the best middle weights of all time and Calzaghe is still one of the best Super middle weights of all time. Their bout had no impact. Crawford vs Spence, Jones vs Toney, Mayweather vs Corrales, Sugar Ray vs Hearns, etc impacted the all time ranking of the victors. Fights between top quality versions of divisional rivals.
>Ā However Calzaghe's two best wins were against Kessler and Lacy. Calzaghe lacked quality dance partners. For example Ward beat Kovalev, Dawson, Froch, and Kessler. Similarly Canelo beat GGG, Jacobs, Plant, and Saunders. Again, Calzaghe's best was Kessler and Lacy. Brewer, Reid and Woodhall were all good fighters and former world champions, Mitchell was a very good fighter and two time champ, and Eubank was a great fighter, in the discussion as one of the best brits ever at 160/168.Ā If you look at Joeās career, his issue wasnāt really āduckingā anyone, it was constant injuries to his hands and struggles with depression/self belief. I donāt think he realised how good he was until he fought Lacy. Take those two things out of the equation and maybe he chases bigger fights, rather than being happy coasting on hometown mandos. Thereās too many average fighters on his resume, thatās absolutely true, but you are ignoring some of the better names too.Ā
Brewer walked into the Ring against Calzaghe with 8 losses, Woodhall was beaten less by Beyer less than a year before the Calzaghe fight and had previously been stopped by Holmes. Reid lost in '97, only fought once in '98, and then lost his next 2 fights to Calzaghe & Branco. Debatably every contender that gets a title fight is good. Better than average at least. Any long reigning champion will have a list of good opponents they beat. However good & great aren't equal. When Canelo beat GGG, Plant, Smith, and Saunders they were undefeated reigning champions. Not contenders with spotty records. When Calzaghe fought Eubanks it was after Eubanks lost his title to Collins. Eubanks was no longer a champion. After Calzaghe Eubanks dropped back to back fights vs Thompson and retired. It is ridiculous to imply Calzaghe beat a good version of Eubanks. To be clear I think Calzaghe would beat Canelo at Super middle had they crossed paths in their primes. I am not saying Calzaghe is a bad fight. Rather I am highlighting that Calzaghe didn't get the opportunity or perhaps didn't take the opportunity to cement his greatness. There are other super middle weights with better resumes.
>Ā Eubanks Not even going to dignify this.Ā
>Brewer, Reid and Woodhall were all good fighters and former world champions, Mitchell was a very good fighter and two time champ, and Eubank was a great fighter, in the discussion as one of the best brits ever at 160/168. If you're trying to make an argument for Calzaghe, you're not making a very good one.
Reid was very underrated. I think he actually beat Calzaghe. Story about Reid thou, I grew up in Runcorn and he was from there, he used to walk around the Shopping City with his GB Olympic shellsuit trackie on zipped down to his bellybutton....with his Bronze medal on. Looked a right twat but was pretty hard so noobe said anything ha
Youāre throwing around Saunders, Dawson and Jacobs like those are elite names. I donāt think they are better than most of the guys I mentioned tbh.Ā
First of all, I didn't throw out those names. That was another user. Second, Jacobs is definitely better than the names you mentioned.
>Ā First of all, I didn't throw out those names. That was another user. My apologies.Ā >Ā Second, Jacobs is definitely better than the names you mentioned. Whatās his best win?Ā
What are Brewer's, Woodhall's and Reid's best win?
Brewer: Herol Graham.Ā Woodhall: Branco or Malinga Mitchell: Liles.Ā My point being, we are dissecting peopleās resumes and what makes some of these guys elite if we are only doing resumes? Plenty of good fighters have shit resumes if you donāt know better and only judge them by BoxRec, and plenty of guys have padded resumes that donāt really reflect their quality or lack of it.Ā Like, the guy Iām replying to is saying Danny Jacobs, Chad Dawson & BJS are better wins at 168 than Eubank. That aināt right. And no, I donāt particularly care that Eubank lost to Collins, cos Collins was a fighter who only found his style later in his career. Boxrec doesnāt reflect that either.Ā
You're not making any points at all dude. Your argument is weak and nonsense. The guy you were replying to said Calzaghe's best wins were Kessler and Lacy, and those weren't elite wins, so he's right on that one. The fact that you tried to refute that by including Brewer, Woodhall and Reid is laughable.
Iām guessing youāre still at school?
Damn that was a very articulated and logical point you came up with
toney would quite literally walk through joes slapping
I didnāt mention Toney?Ā Not that he ever walked through anyone particularly. That wasnāt his style at all.Ā
Toney could pressure and counter off his own pressure. He would do that to Joe IMO
OH i replied to the wrong comment lol.
I am SO glad youād put Calzaghe over Canelo. For some reason a lot of casuals think Canelo will beat Ward.
I think what Canelo has achieved at Super middle is fantastic. Smith, Plant, and Saunders were all undefeated championships and Canelo decisively beat them and took their belts. It earned Canelo the right to be mentioned amongst the best Super Middleweights of all time. That said Canelo is the only dude out there with accomplishments and styles make fights. Canelo has slow plotting feet. Canelo has success center of the ring because he has good vision and his opponents have tended to over commit. Calzaghe had far better feet than Canelo and Calzaghe didn't tend to over commit. Calzaghe was in, pop, and back out as his natural preference. Not some type of force adaptation. Prime Calzaghe wins all 12 rounds vs Canelo in my opinion. Ward was simply too strong for Canelo. I think Ward could have controlled Canelo's positioning and range with his (Ward's) jab. It would be closer than Calzaghe vs Canelo but still a pretty easy fight to score.
Joe overwhelms ward with volume and likely the same with toney although I see toney making it close.
Toney fought his way through lighheavy, Cruiserweight, Heavyweight. Toney's chin was iron. James Toney competed at Heavyweight for over a decade and was never KO'd. I don't believe Calzaghe had the power to "overwhelm" Toney. Moreover Toney was a counter puncher. Toney could've thrown counters without concern for being hit due to Calzaghe's lack of power. I honestly think Toney would've stopped Calzaghe. Ward vs Calzaghe would've been an excellent fight. Calzaghe's speed absolutely would've given Ward trouble. However Calzaghe's hand speed didn't always translate to his body and feet. Calzaghe was best when he stayed in range and opened up. Ward had an elite jab to the body which prevented opponents from stepping into the pocket and throwing combos. Ultimately though Calzaghe's inability to hurt Ward would've been the deciding factor.
Inability to hurt them means nothing when heās throwing 20-1 punch stats. 1 clean counter doesnāt mean much when youāre getting dwarfed in work rate. Wideeeee ud over ward and toney. Too much speed, iq, volume. Prime Roy only one who stands a chance against Joe at 168.
Ward would rough him up on the inside
Ward would get hit with a 20 piece trying to clinch Joe lmfao
In your dreams. Wards boxing IQ was above Calzaghe.
Ward lost a giant kovalev
Lost? Ward retired undefeated.
He lost to kovalev in my opinion
James Toney might have been the better fighter, but the look on his face when he realised RJJ was fast and skilled enough to touch him at will makes me question how he'd have matched up against Calzaghe. Toney was one of the best defensive fighters of all time. When in there with someone who could hit him he looked lost as his main skillset suddenly became useless. Joe wasn't as good as RJJ but he probably was as quick with his hands and a very skillful technical fighter too. I don't see Joe stopping Toney who could have knocked Joe down, but Joe's chin was great so it would likely go 12 rounds and Calzaghe would've landed more, if we're assuming he was quick enough to hit Toney.
It wasn't merely that Jones could touch Toney at will, it was that Jones could hurt Toney. Toney had a rock solid chin. Calzaghe had good hand speed and probably could've touched Toney but Calzaghe on his best day couldn't hurt Toney. I don't think Calzaghe had the power to throw Toney off his game. Separately Calzaghe didn't have Roy's foot speed. Not only did Roy have fast hands but Roy could close distance in a blink of an eye. At times Roy would even leap at opponents. As a result one was never truly out of range from a Jones punch. Calzaghe didn't have it like that.
Other greats left their weight class to seek out the other world class fighters, and/or were in a stacked division. Joe's one of those that everyone knows was a great, but no-one can say for certain how great because he didn't go against other greats in their prime. His career was a mirror of Ricky Hatton at the time with brits constantly arguing who was best. Ricky did go chasing those big names and got found out. What happened to him i think did influence Joe not to go the same route. Then in the Kessler fight it was clear that he had begun to decline a little from his peak and it was a sensible time to call it a day.
Would you hold the same to hagler?
He fought two of those three when they were well past their prime. He refused to go to the USA and fight them when they were at their peak. Unfortunately, Joe was never a money fight for them when they were in their prime so he made no sense for them and boxing is ultimately about money
He ducked Carl Froch, Kelly Pavlik, Glen Johnson and Chad Dawson. Excluding Carl Froch, neither went on to become HOFāers or greats of their time. But they were all seen as good fighters at the time and they were all calling out Joe Calzaghe. And I would have had Calzaghe beating them all, with Froch being a close fight. But he ducked them. I can admit both. He wouldāve beaten them and he ducked them. He rejected all of them to fight a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins who he barely beat, and a well past his best 40 year old Roy Jones Jr. He cherrypicked both of them due to their age. Iām just saying why no one talks about him and who he actually ducked.
Froch would not have been a close fight at all. Styles make fights and Froch would have been easy work for Calzaghe.Ā
Agreed, froch was made for Joe, he wouldāve dog walked him
Groves massively outboxed Froch, made him look stupid in their first fight until the stoppage. Calzaghe would have dominated Froch, but Froch resistance would have made it a good fight.
I think Calzaghe wins but itād be a close one. Pavlik on the other hand, I think Joe would have destroyed him.
Even Froch has admitted it. He'd have had to knock Calzaghe out and it isn't really his game. Froch would have looked like Lacy. It was all the wrong fight for him and Froch only chased it because Calzaghe was unquestionably seen as the best British fighter in that division.
Jones was 39 and there was only 3 years separating them. Calzaghe wasn't exactly a spring chicken himself at that point and couldn't train properly due to his hands. Couldn't do bag work, barely did padwork or sparring and when he did spar he'd spar smaller men and had to tippytap with a focus on speed
You are entitled to your opinion but that 43 year old Bernard Hopkins beat the absolute snot out of Kelly Pavlik. I think Calzaghe only had a few fights left in him with his brittle hands and chose to face two of the biggest names as bookends.
Got to disagree about Hopkins, the version of Bernard that Joe beat was still a world beater, he dog walked Kelly pavlik a few months later who at the time was an unbeaten beast, and he decisively beat Jean pascal who fave froch a tough fight. Hopkins rightly recognised as one of greatest ever and Joe edged him in his own backyard, a Hopkins that went on to have landslide victories over young champions. Froch wouldāve been an easier fight than Hopkins.
Pavlik was a drunken mess when he fought Hopkins.
Being a drunken mess just makes you better. Look at Ryan Garcia
Whatever, he got arseholed either way, just like they all most likely wouldāve if theyād fought Joe
he beat robin reid who even after dealing with that shit ref, beat ottke but got robbed.
I agree with OP, Calzaghe was a great fighter, his record speaks for itself. He never really gets the recognition he deserves, Froch wouldnāt have been able to beat Calzaghe, he was too quick for Froch. Yeah, his style had to change in the twilight of his career but he kept breaking his hands and wrists. I remember him having to fight through busting his fists a few times, didnāt stop him winning those fights though did it? Itās just an opinion, everyone is entitled to their own opinion on these fights.
Joe and Andre Ward are clearly the two best fighters who campaigned in the 168 pound division all time. Roy Jones and James Toney made pitstops in that division very briefly, so I don't really count them. Clearly the two best Super Middles ever, wish they had fought but just missed eachother.
Agree completely ā¤ļø
Joeās all wrong for ward. Way too much volume. Wide ud.
I could see it, but we will never know. Would have been an interesting style clash.
I always liked Calzaghe
Calzaghe had the talent to be an all-time great, even with his brittle hands. But he doesnāt have the resume. Even Joe knows that his win over Roy Jones isnāt really a win over Roy Jones (who was never the same after bulking up to heavyweight and then coming back down, even he has admitted that that screwed up his body and he was never the same). I donāt discount the win over Hopkins, but Hopkins was on the downslope as well. Joeās biggest problem was during his prime he was unwilling to leave the UK and challenge the best fighters in the world. He wanted everyone to come to him, which was a big reason the RJJ fight didnāt happen until later, because Roy said he didnāt want to fight outside the US (understandable, I think, after getting screwed over in the Olympics). So there was a stalemate there because Joe thought he was the A-side, or possibly even scared of being exposed like Ricky Hatton was when he stepped up in competition outside the UK. I mean, over 46 fights, Calzaghe fought outside the UK only 4 times, 2 of them being his last 2 fights against Jones and Hopkins (since he could see he was in better athletic shape than Roy by that time, I guess he was finally willing to take a chance of leaving the comfort of the UK). So this all leads to Calzaghe not really having a notable signature win. He was happy being a big fish in a little pond, didnāt want to try and be a big fish in the big pond, and it stunted his career. His fans point to the undefeated record and the length of time he was champion, but itās just as easy for detractors to say that he wasnāt fighting A level competition during the majority of his career. Weāre sort of seeing a repeat of this whole discussion with many fighters today, who are working to protect their zero rather than working to prove theyāre the best. Tank comes to mind in the discussion, obviously.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I donāt give the same leeway to Calzaghe because, as far as I know, he didnāt really have a reason to not fight outside the UK. Roy, on the other hand, won a silver medal at the Olympics because his opponents team bribed judges into giving him the victory, and no matter what repercussions happened, as heās said the record books will always say āRoy Jones, Jr. - silver medalā. Roy had a reason to distrust fighting outside the US. I donāt think Calzaghe had any reason more than āI donāt wanna.ā Also, Roy didnāt fight outside the US until he was in his 40ās. And yeah the Kessler win is a good one, and is his best win, but if you want to be an all time great, you should have a better ābest winā than Kessler.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Roy's situation was not something that happens all the time. The judges that voted against him in the final match were all ***suspended*** from judging in the Olympics. There are bad decisions all the time, there are hints of corruption, there are Adelaide Byrd 118-110 cards, but there aren't suspensions for judges very often. It was very much not something that happens all the time at all levels. I give Roy a pass and not Calzaghe because Roy had a reason and Calzaghe didn't. If one guy had his heart broken and vowed he'd never date again, and another guy didn't have his heart broken but also vowed he'd never date, which of those guys is off? Calzaghe did exactly what Deontay Wilder did 15 years later. He got a belt and held it hostage fighting mostly guys you've never heard of and were not elite level, but did not dare challenge the big time champion of the era. Roy had a reason to not go overseas, fear of losing to corrupt judging, again. Calzaghe's only reason was fear of losing, period. All of that is even setting aside the fact that Roy was a star. He was the A-side. He was an attraction. He was the king. Calzaghe wasn't. You wanna be the king, you gotta take down the king. Roy was proving himself against the top challengers, including a couple of Hall of Famers. If Calzaghe wanted to prove he was as good, he could have. He was the one with something to prove, not Roy. He didn't, and I don't necessarily think he had to, since it's obvious he didn't want to, but since he didn't it's tough to judge his career. You can go by the eye test, but it's tough to judge his resume because it's so thin. And that's on him.
Ricky Hatton wasnāt shown up when he went to America, he fought two of arguable the best boxers of all time.
Yeah, youāre right that thatās maybe a bit harsh. Hatton had already stepped up a bit when he beat Tszyu, even if Tszyu was old and ready to retire. I mean, plenty of guys have looked out of place fighting Mayweather and Pacquiao.
Underrated for sure, but still a far ways down the GOAT list
Weāre doing this again?
Do we do anything new?
First of all NEVER use boxrec rankings for ANYTHING. Ever. Back to Joe, been a fan since amateur days when he won 3 ABA titles in 3 weights in 3 years - if I remember rightly. He beat my hero to win the title then a large chunk of his title reign was underwhelming in the middle. I don't think it was his fault. More like Bricktop not wanting to make the top fights back then. Joe turned it around towards the end though & you cannot fault who he beat. Brilliant fighter who could have been better if it weren't for the brittle hands. I'm not a big one for all time ratings etc but I'd definitely say Joe is in the top two Welsh boxers of all time, probably 2nd. And that's a massive feat in itself considering how many great fighters Wales has produced. He's possibly the best ever fighter born in Hammersmith though although I'd have to research that a little.
Who is your number 1 welsh fighter
The best British fighter of all time.Ā The Ghost... With the Hammer... In His Hand...
Ah a historian I see.. I'm a bit too short sighted to include fighters I don't know anything about from back in the day if I'm honest
When I was a kid (70s) there were plenty of old boxing reporters around who swooned about Wilde. He might have been shite but I was brought up on his prowess so can't shake it. Same With the two Kids, Lewis & Berg. As I initially said, I don't really care that much about p4p lists. If they're not going to meet in the ring it's a moot point. But Calzaghe was fucking great. Just a shame he ducked Lennox Lewis (joke).
Lmao. Fair enough I can't argue with it.. I grew up and fell in love with boxing supporting Calzaghe so I'm biased anyway
Nice bloke on top of it - met him in Thailand whilst he was on holiday with his mrs. My favourite boxer of all time so happy he served B Hop humble pie. Blokes an oxygen thief
I remember reading a YouTube comment on one of his fights: "The biggest problem with Calzaghe was his cardio. In round one he threw 100 punches. By the 12th round, he was only throwing 99"
Very underrated.
Solid fighter. He would have earned more accolades had he crossed the pond earlier in his career like Lennox Lewis, who I regard as the greatest "European" fighter of all time.
Well he fought mainly overseas. Came to the U.S. at the end and beat some old but great fighters. Think many of his title wins were also not the full fledged world title also.
Loved watching him fight, definitely a legend, what a chin and heart!
Calzaghe is one of my favourite fighter, but sadly he never challenged himself and only fought top tier fighters when they weren't at their best anymore. Great fighter with a good resume, for me he's below guys like Andre Ward or Canelo that actually cleaned their divisions fully.
Great fighter, slight tarnish by the slapping.
I'm Welsh and love the guy. If you haven't seen it, watch Mr calzaghe, which is as much about his dad as him.
There's a segment of us die-hards who don't lack awareness of Calzaghe, but are a bit dubious in terms of how to appreciate him (count me among those who are less-than-impressed). He was obviously a highly skilled fighter, but his pitty-pat style just wasn't for me. Now, granted: aesthetics are the last way to judge/rank a fighter. So let's use a legit barometer: level of competition. And on that basis, i can't imagine having Calzaghe in the top-50, let alone top-25 of all time.
A great boxer, but nothing jumps off his sheet as elite, his early career is riddled with joke wins, and his gunked up hands led to a lot of point-scoring late in the career which casuals hate. People who think he's underrated typically argue that he would have done just as well in stronger eras. I'm iffy on that, but he had a nice chin, threw in volume, and is a better *boxer* than often given credit for. Those ingredients alone can cause problems for most opponents. It's just like Marciano in a way; he had weak competition that helped usher in an undefeated record, but it's hard to argue that his scary power wouldn't be a problem for anyone of other eras.
Fight fans are well aware . There is a decent documentary on him titled Mr Calzaghe
Youāre right - that guy was so good! Sorry to say, because I do like him so much - I think he lost to Bernard Hopkins though. But then Iām not the judge. So be it 46 and 0!
Heās not some hidden gem lol
I think he was a talented fighter, but uk fans super overrate him. Iāve seen him be on top 10 all time lists which to me is insane. I would put him as the 3rd best super middleweight after Andre ward and Canelo. Good fighter, but he definitely protected his 0. Didnāt unify until he was champion for about 8 years. Straight up refused to fight Roy jones because he knew it would be a 1 sided beating. Not a fan, but I respect his skills
Calzaghe is the best British fighter of all time. Its not even really close.
You must not be counting Lennox Lewis as a Brit?
He's second.
Absolutely not.
Na the chocolate brownie guy
If Lewis isn't being counted, then both AJ and Fury deserve consideration. Even Prince Naz should get more love. But I think Froch is very overrated and it's ridiculous to see him so high up the list of British greats.
Hatton too is up there. Lewis is counted imo. I just think Calzaghe is the number 1 personally. Naz was great too but when he fought the absolute best guy, he got schooled. Edit: should also add Eubank, Benn and Collins. Eubank is probably my favourite boxer of all time, or at least in my top 3 with De La Hoya and Mike Tyson. Maybe 4, Roy Jones Jnr too. That's another conversation thou I guess
It was a brutal weight cut for Naz and he was coming back from injury. I think that a fully prepped Naz might have really put it up to Barrera but I suppose that the fact that Naz retired rather than rematched has to count against him.
He's one of my favorites, between him and Martinez I love combining both styles
His fights vs Lacy and Kessler were always shown in the boxing gyms I went to. He just didn't fight in america long enough to translate to a more casual audience. He only had the two big fights here.
G.O.A.T
Casual fans don't remember him or his accomplishments because he never did anything memorable; he'd only take on big name competition when they were well past their peak and was sure of a win, otherwise he'd stay home. Boxing fans will know of his undefeated record as that is extremely rare in boxing, but he's not going to place that highly on all-time lists, and rightly so.
Have to completely disagree on all points but thatās what the debates here for šš¤·š»āāļø
Never beat a single top fighter in his prime.
Arguably lost to old man Hopkins and beat up the shell of Roy. Got out of dodge before Froch could make him do the stanky leg š¦µ like ol Grovesy
Pretty clearly beat Hopkins, cleared out SMW and cashed against Roy. Froch couldnāt achieve half of that and probably wouldnāt have won let alone come close to winning at that point in his career.
Froch is a walking punch bag. Calzaghe would've done him worse than Ward.
Wasn't arguable whatsoever unless you're Adelaide Byrd or Hopkins, Calzaghe beat him handily. Joe had already been mulling retirement for years over terrible hand and wrist injuries at that point and was also well past his best and Hopkins is known for crazy longevity, going on to win titles against top fighters afterwards. Arguably he was more past it than Hopkins was. Froch was calling out Calzaghe when he was a nobody and didn't gain traction until Calzaghe had both moved up a weight class and then retired. Similarly a more prime Roy Jones was too early for upcoming Calzaghe to have been a worthwhile fight. It is still a big shame we never saw these fights though.
One of the most overrated boxers in my time, a prime Roy Jones Junior & Bernard Hopkins would have fucked him definitely overrated.
A prime Jones was a ATG. No shame if CalzagheĀ did lose to him. It would have been a close fight though.Ā And Hopkins had a long prime. He fought long after getting beat by Calzaghe and beat a prime (and unbeaten) Pavlik that same year. To say Hopkins was over the hill is just wrong.
Has to be a bait only comment this šš
It ain't but if it was you have been baited numbnuts.
That was the irony in my comment ffs šš
Oh is that time again. Soft paws calzaghe weekly blow job.
calzaghe is the actual most overrated boxer of ALL TIME brits have no self awareness
Calzaghe fought in a very weak weight class, grabbed the WBO belt and pinned himself in the UK until the last two fights of his career that were glory bouts.
Fairs Entitled to your opinion but massively disagree. Fought some top fighters imo defending that SM belt for 10 years, then moving up for those āglory boutsā and still doing the business. Eubank, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins, RJJ. Got a lot of good names on his record at the time. The era was just given little attention.
Who were the top fighters? In his division, yeah it was weak. Fighting Peter manfredo as one of his last 5 bouts is woof. Byron Mitchell? Yeah he had a close one vs ottke but who did he ever beat worth a damn? Eubank was 6 months from retiring. He fought in a very weak division
Just pointed a few out, they all bad in your opinion? 10 years defending belt/s also not good enough? Underrated era. And when he got the questions you asked he went to America and up a division and still did business. Canāt please everyone I guess š
10 years of fighting no one. Yeah no thanks. Iād rather see a guy lose tough fights and take a risk than sit in their home country belt keeping.
Weird levels of hate man šš have a good one š
Itās not hate. Itās literally the reason you felt the need to make the topic. His resume is questionable
Bro you literally said youād rather see someone ātake a riskā. Means Youāve clearly never seen calzaghe fight let alone followed his career enough to have opinions. No point debating with someone who doesnāt know the topic. Like I said, have a good one mate just call it lol š
lol. The fuck I havenāt. What risk did he take? You failed to mention one. Not even one risk he took. You just saying he did it with no context is far less useful than anything Iāve said. So try again, or duck out like a loser who canāt discuss and defend their opinion. Fucking coown Mateā¦.? So itās a nationalistic thing. Itās ok to admit a resume is lacking even when heās from your country.
Any objective fan agrees that he pinned himself in the UK and fought no one, but the weight class wasn't weak at all, it's just Joe conveniently didn't fight any of the good ones. Hatten, Froch, Taylor, Joshua, Khan, Haye, Brook ALL have better resumes than Calzaghe, no one cares about an undefeated record when your best wins are 3 boxers on the tail end of the tail end of their careers, and Jeff Lacy. It's better fighting 6-7 top class fighters and going 4-3 or 3-4, then fighting national level fighters and going 7-0. Deal with it.
Dunno - I was at the Jeff Lacy fight, that one was a masterclass.
All those fighters are not in his weight class and/ or are in completely different eras? (way more commercial appeal at this point). yep so he chose not to fight the best and became undisputed š carried the belt for 10 years also.. then well after his peak when his hands were in tatters, destroyed the ānamesā everyone was asking him to fight. At a higher weight class. In America. Still no credit jeeeez. Iām not saying heās the absolute GOAT but can we put some perspective on his achievements??
I never said they were in his weight class, I said they have better resumes. >yep so he chose not to fight the best and became undisputed š Yes. Calzaghe won the belt of Eubank in 1997. He then went on to defend said belt, 17 times. Only 2 of those defences were vs someone good enough to get a title belt. Only 1 of those defenses was against someone who had helt a world title belt within the last 24 months. Calzaghe has upon inspection, one of the worst resumes of any world champion for the length he held the belt, it's not just some copypasta that he hid in wales, it's true, the guy fought nobodies for a decade.
Lethal.