Could Ward outdo Calzaghe?

Simple one, If Ward beats Froch then goes on to beat Bute, would it be reasonable to believe he has a better claim to being the best Super Middleweight of all time then Calzaghe?

yes. yes it would.

calzaghe didnt do much in terms of opposition. just the longevity of his reign wins him applause although the win over an unbeaten kessler was great.

as a fighter - ward has a long way to be near calzaghe as for me, the win over hopkins cemented him as a legend..

I think it would push him close and if he could go on to defend his titles for a few years after to add some longetivity to his reign without any mishaps he would certainly have a valid claim. I would say yes he has in that case.

Needs more than froch and bute imo. As manos alluded to if he can add a long reign and add some additional quality names then yes.

With that said due to calzaghes rep on here with some members i imagine whoever wins out of these two will already be rated higher in their eyes.

Depends largely on how good people like Froch and Bute turn out to be. Froch is proven as a very good boxer if not great boxer but after Ward will have few fights left. Bute is a bit more intruiging due to a largely awful resume. If Ward beats Bute but Bute goes into meltdown like some fighters do when they lose their "0" then no way does Ward's achievements compare given Calzaghe's longevity. Even though Ward butted Kessler into oblivion, Calzaghe broke his heart first.

So no.

Beating Froch and Bute alone wouldn't be enough for me. I'd like to see a long-term dominance afterwards before comparing his 168 lb legacy to Calzaghe's, as I don't think Froch and Bute really represent an improvement on Calzaghe's best wins. Remember, Ward is yet to even establish himself as the consensus number one at Super-Middleweight. Beating Froch and Bute would give him a huge bump up the rankings but he'd need time to build his own 'era' so to speak before his claim becomes stronger than Calzaghe's.

If he continues to fight all of his fights in his own living room then cant the same criticisms of being a stay at home fighter be levelled at him? Hes a bit to go to match or surpass Calzaghe imo.

Calzaghe's win against Kessler is superior. The Abraham win is no better than Lacy and if he beats Froch its not as good a win as Hopkins. I rate Bute more than most and if he travelled to Candada for the fight and won then hes on the right road. He has time but still has a bit to do.

kevchadders wrote:Needs more than frock and bite imo. As man's alluded to if he can add a long reign and added some additional quality names then yes.

With that said due to calzaghes rep on here with some members i imagine whoever wins out of these two will already be rated higher in their eyes.

but frock and bite are legends imo

depends what you mean in terms of his SMW perhaps yeah

AlexHuckerby wrote:

kevchadders wrote:Needs more than frock and bite imo. As man's alluded to if he can add a long reign and added some additional quality names then yes.

With that said due to calzaghes rep on here with some members i imagine whoever wins out of these two will already be rated higher in their eyes.

but frock and bite are legends imo

Lol blasted phone predictive text...

Well you also have to consider that beating Froch, Kessler and Bute would essentially mean he had unified his division and beaten all his rivals and the best in the division in just a few years. I tend to see this as worthy at least as good as an accomplishment, if not better, than Joes endless WBO reign which took a decade to unify and also failed to oust Ottke.

The consistency and longetivity Calzaghe had over a long period is worth something but I see unify and taking care of all your rivals the way Ward hypothetically would do in this scenario as more impressive. Adding some longetivity would rubber stamp it then.

Also the Calzaghes win over Hopkins was at light heavy so I would not count that as relevant to super middleweight status.

what i was veering at manos... hopkins is his best win but it wasnt at SMW so is out of the discussion.

Ward is on his 25th fight next and his resume will read Froch, Abraham and Kessler as his 3 biggest wins - presuming he beats Froch. I'm just looking at Calzaghe's resume and at 168lbs he has Kessler & Lacy. It's a close one because some people rate his longevity but there's very few top contenders Calzaghe actually beat in that 10-year period at 168lbs. If Ward continues after Froch to beat a Bute then that'll seal it. Calzaghe's resume isn't what it's made to be.

put it like this so far ward has a better record than joe did at this point in his career

Agreed.

But...head to head Joe whups Ward, I'd say.

ward is an uknown quantity perhaps fists (you knew thatd stir things up you!)

Calzaghe would beat Ward. Calzaghe is an all time great imo he would have too much speed and skill for Ward who is not as good. Calzaghe lacked power so I do not think he would knock ward out but I think he would win most rounds unless it was a robbery.

Even as a fantasy fight Ward Calzaghe would struggle to get made. Whose back garden would it be in?

why im wondering about ward/bute actually happening joey.

Could Ward outdo Calzaghe? Yeah. Another twenty fights against taxi drivers and a couple fights abroad against old farts. What a legacy to aim for.

Agreed Alex, its difficult to see it at the moment. Neither are super fight material yet, and it will only get made for a lot of money.

BALTIMORA wrote:Could Ward outdo Calzaghe? Yeah. Another twenty fights against taxi drivers and a couple fights abroad against old farts. What a legacy to aim for.

very bitter today balti.

I would say yes.
Calzaghe may have longevity at the weight but the opposition was usually of a poor quality; many of whom were not even rated contenders in what was a weak division at the time.
Calzaghe's best win at SMW was against Kessler, a win that Ward has already matched. His other big wins at the weight were Lacy and a faded Eubank. I'd consider Froch and Bute to be superior wins to have on record.

Fists of Fury wrote:But...head to head Joe whups Ward, I'd say.

I dont agree with a whupping. Joe may win but I reckon Ward will give him a very decent argument. It wouldn't surprise me if Ward raised his game and took a close decision. He is very talented.

JC was very good. People are making too much out of the Lacy fight. I believe he was on the slide when he beat Lacy. A few years earlier before the hand troubles he was better and a more concussive puncher. He just didn;t have the competition to showcase his talents fully.

Ward has all the talent JC possessed.

Ward is a long way off Calzaghe for me Super six winner or not, Calzaghe is ranked more for his longevity rather than the quality of opponents.

Joe is faster than Ward, and has a much higher punch output than Ward. Clear decision.

I think beating Froch and Bute would put him just ahead of Joe.

I suppose he could knock over cans for a few years in his home town to cement his "legacy".

Prime head to head I think I'd pick Calzaghe to nick a close, maybe split, decision. Of course Joe would never actually fight him.

Whoever wins and turns over Bute does it for me personally.

And calling Ward vs Calzaghe would be a tough one, not least because Joe would pull out more times than Peter North which makes the arguement pointless.

Not sure on Calzaghe/Ward sitting down and thinking about it in truth, Ward perhaps hasn't even hit his actual prime just yet, he is somewhat of an unknown quantity so far, he beat a Kessler that wasn't quite as good as the version that Calzaghe beat, but he beat him far more convincingly than Joe did.

Joe was never too hard to find to be honest and i could see Ward getting him into his kind of fight and picking him off with quick right hands and then leaning into him, I could see Joe's speed and workrate being an issue but Ward has a very good defense it makes it very tricky to actually pick a winner to be honest.

What makes you think Joe would win so easily Fists?

No Not for me...It will put him on the path but there will always be the argument wuold he have beaten joe? and I would comfortably say no...everything he is good at Joe was better.

Joe is the best SMW of all time IMO...in terms of all round ability...I cant see ard beating Froch in fairness.

J.Benson II wrote:I would say yes.
Calzaghe may have longevity at the weight but the opposition was usually of a poor quality; many of whom were not even rated contenders in what was a weak division at the time.
Calzaghe's best win at SMW was against Kessler, a win that Ward has already matched. His other big wins at the weight were Lacy and a faded Eubank. I'd consider Froch and Bute to be superior wins to have on record.

Ward hasn't matched Calzaghe's best win. Calzaghe fought and beat an undefeated champion two years prior to Ward beating the same man.

If Ward had beaten the undefeated champion it would be the same. Otherwise it is closer to saying Buster Douglas win against Tyson was the same as Williams' win over Tyson (a bit extreme but you get my meaning).

AlexHuckerby wrote:why im wondering about ward/bute actually happening joey.

Got to be honest this one has me wondering as well. If Ward wins the S6 I don't think he'll go near Bute. He';s already stated in the "Staredown" programme that the winner of the S6 is the best supermiddle in the world and in many ways he's right. He doesn't therefore need Bute as much as Bute needs him and being the man with 2 belts and a far better resume there's no way he would or even should go to Canada. So I see Ward targetting the likes of Dawson, Pascal or Hopkins and moving up weights. Bute will continue beating up old men and janitors.

huw wrote:

J.Benson II wrote:I would say yes.
Calzaghe may have longevity at the weight but the opposition was usually of a poor quality; many of whom were not even rated contenders in what was a weak division at the time.
Calzaghe's best win at SMW was against Kessler, a win that Ward has already matched. His other big wins at the weight were Lacy and a faded Eubank. I'd consider Froch and Bute to be superior wins to have on record.

Ward hasn't matched Calzaghe's best win. Calzaghe fought and beat an undefeated champion two years prior to Ward beating the same man.

If Ward had beaten the undefeated champion it would be the same. Otherwise it is closer to saying Buster Douglas win against Tyson was the same as Williams' win over Tyson (a bit extreme but you get my meaning).

The thing is, Kessler's best ever win came after his loss to Ward so there isnt really anything to suggest that he was faded by the time he fought the American.
I agree that Calzaghe's win over the Dane should rank slightly higher but from what I saw from Kessler's last performance (against Bouadla), he looked pretty much identical to the fighter that beat Mundine and Andrade.
Ward was just too good for him.

Well if that happens then Super D, you would very much hope that Bute at the very least takes on Froch albeit him coming in runner up of the Super 6.

J.Benson II wrote:

huw wrote:

J.Benson II wrote:I would say yes.
Calzaghe may have longevity at the weight but the opposition was usually of a poor quality; many of whom were not even rated contenders in what was a weak division at the time.
Calzaghe's best win at SMW was against Kessler, a win that Ward has already matched. His other big wins at the weight were Lacy and a faded Eubank. I'd consider Froch and Bute to be superior wins to have on record.

Ward hasn't matched Calzaghe's best win. Calzaghe fought and beat an undefeated champion two years prior to Ward beating the same man.

If Ward had beaten the undefeated champion it would be the same. Otherwise it is closer to saying Buster Douglas win against Tyson was the same as Williams' win over Tyson (a bit extreme but you get my meaning).

The thing is, Kessler's best ever win came after his loss to Ward so there isnt really anything to suggest that he was faded by the time he fought the American.
I agree that Calzaghe's win over the Dane should rank slightly higher but from what I saw from Kessler's last performance (against Bouadla), he looked pretty much identical to the fighter that beat Mundine and Andrade.
Ward was just too good for him.

Agreed his decline doesn't look great but mentally losing for the first time can take away an edge.

Can also make you better.

J.Benson II wrote:

huw wrote:

J.Benson II wrote:I would say yes.
Calzaghe may have longevity at the weight but the opposition was usually of a poor quality; many of whom were not even rated contenders in what was a weak division at the time.
Calzaghe's best win at SMW was against Kessler, a win that Ward has already matched. His other big wins at the weight were Lacy and a faded Eubank. I'd consider Froch and Bute to be superior wins to have on record.

Ward hasn't matched Calzaghe's best win. Calzaghe fought and beat an undefeated champion two years prior to Ward beating the same man.

If Ward had beaten the undefeated champion it would be the same. Otherwise it is closer to saying Buster Douglas win against Tyson was the same as Williams' win over Tyson (a bit extreme but you get my meaning).

The thing is, Kessler's best ever win came after his loss to Ward so there isnt really anything to suggest that he was faded by the time he fought the American.
I agree that Calzaghe's win over the Dane should rank slightly higher but from what I saw from Kessler's last performance (against Bouadla), he looked pretty much identical to the fighter that beat Mundine and Andrade.
Ward was just too good for him.

Actually I thought Kessler was looking a bit shop worn when he beat Froch. He won by sheer willpower more than anything. The snap in his jab and the usual crispness in his lovely right cross just wasn't there. I'm not saying any version of Kessler could beat Ward but Kessler himself on numerous occassions has said he had a real bad day at the office against Ward and has always stated out of the two fights he's lost, the Calzaghe one gets to him the most because he just had a bad day against Ward.

Can I ask, why is 'longevity' so important to some people?

Ranking fighters is always very difficult but I'd rather look for strength and depth of opposition than simple quantum. I'm not disputing how good Calzaghe was, and (a bit like when I compare him to Froch) I'd back him to actually win (close UD) a head-to-head with Ward, however if Ward within 2-3 years has the best fighters on his CV I don't know how you can rate Calzaghe ahead of him on the basis of Pudwell etc.

Joe's CV is just too much 'filler' and not enough 'killer' for my tastes.

Personally I can't see why Froch can't do everything that is being said on here. Beat Ward then Bute before stepping up a weight and destroying Pascal. Dawson, then Cloud and finally Cleverly.

Job done.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Can I ask, why is 'longevity' so important to some people?

Ranking fighters is always very difficult but I'd rather look for strength and depth of opposition than simple quantum. I'm not disputing how good Calzaghe was, and (a bit like when I compare him to Froch) I'd back him to actually win (close UD) a head-to-head with Ward, however if Ward within 2-3 years has the best fighters on his CV I don't know how you can rate Calzaghe ahead of him on the basis of Pudwell etc.

Joe's CV is just too much 'filler' and not enough 'killer' for my tastes.

I think you have to have balance between longevity and quality. Calzaghe does have a demonstrable lack of quality on his CV but people are too quick to dismiss longevity as unimportant, something which of course Calzaghe has in abundance. It's like you still gotta train all those years and still turn up to knock out and beat whatever's put in front of you and Calzaghe never cut any corners in training, never took anyone for granted and of course never lost. He should get some credit for that when you consider Lewis lost twice to fighters he should have licked first time out but he got lazy and complacent on a few occassions and it cost him. Calzaghe never did at any stage of his reign so he deserves credit for that.

KingMonkey wrote:Personally I can't see why Froch can't do everything that is being said on here. Beat Ward then Bute before stepping up a weight and destroying Pascal. Dawson, then Cloud and finally Cleverly.

Job done.

Who said he can't?

Fair point but rather than chuck up another near identical thread I thought I'd say it here.

Does Froch's loss to Kessler hold him back from 'outdoing' Joe?

I think it's bound to considering that is Joe's best super middle win. But if Froch could right the wrong as it were his stock would go up massively. I think Lennox gets massive credit for avenging the losses of Rahman and McCall. I really wish Khan had shut up Prescott once and for all but alas he didn't want to risk it.

Khan "not risking it" is a bit harsh on Khan there... Think we can all see Khan is completely different and improved and since the healing process Prescott has stalled against Mitchell in the next fight and recently lost twice (In fights he probably should have won though to be fair) Whereas Khan won a world title and fact is that Prescott never managed to knock on the door in terms of earning a rematch. (Sounds strange considering he sparked him in the first one)

Personally I think you have to take Calzaghes longetivity with a pinch of salt. It highlights consistency at a high level, but realistic with Calzaghe this was just defending a WBO strap against mediocrity. Its not like he was undisputed reigning champion for 10 years.

I think its alot more impressive for Ward to unify his division, beat all his key rivals and establish himself as the best in the division in just a few yars than what Calzaghe did just defending a strap. Ward could easily do this if he just held onto his WBA belt and defended against mandatories for the next 6 years.

Unless Ward was to completely go to pot after unifying the division then I think its comfortably more of an acheivement.

We crdit Froch for his willinness to take on the best so the same must hld true for Ward and in some ways I think exonerating Calzaghes rather unambitious stretch as champion goes against this and advocaates avoiding rivals and failing to unify a division for a large period.

Realistically it would have been better for Calzaghe to unify SMW quickly in 3 years which he was well capable of and go on to better things than WBO mandatories for 6 years.

manos de piedra wrote:Personally I think you have to take Calzaghes longetivity with a pinch of salt. It highlights consistency at a high level, but realistic with Calzaghe this was just defending a WBO strap against mediocrity. Its not like he was undisputed reigning champion for 10 years.

I think its alot more impressive for Ward to unify his division, beat all his key rivals and establish himself as the best in the division in just a few yars than what Calzaghe did just defending a strap. Ward could easily do this if he just held onto his WBA belt and defended against mandatories for the next 6 years.

Unless Ward was to completely go to pot after unifying the division then I think its comfortably more of an acheivement.

We crdit Froch for his willinness to take on the best so the same must hld true for Ward and in some ways I think exonerating Calzaghes rather unambitious stretch as champion goes against this and advocaates avoiding rivals and failing to unify a division for a large period.

Realistically it would have been better for Calzaghe to unify SMW quickly in 3 years which he was well capable of and go on to better things than WBO mandatories for 6 years.

Absolute rubbish. Calzaghe's "pinch of salt" longevity would be the equivalent of him losing to Byron Mitchell or Omar Sheika. Lewis lost to even bigger dross he should have cleaned out first time. You still have to show up against your opponents and he fought enough decent fighters who could have put him out to dry if he hadn't have done.

Also Froch's "willingness" stems from him being signed to a competition that picks his fights for him.

I think a major problem with Calzaghe's reign at super middle was a limited German champion that refused to fight him. Not saying Calzaghe can be completely exhonerated for not making this fight happen but it was clear at the time that Ottke and his people had no real appetite for the fight. Apart from Ottke, Calzaghe fought pretty much everyone else relevant at super middle, so his longevity deserves a lot more than a pinch of salt. Maybe a mound of salt perhaps.

Also Froch's "willingness" stems from him being signed to a competition that picks his fights for him.

What on earth aer you on about?! Froch knew who was going into the competition, therefore he has shown he has willingness to face the best around.

I do wonder sometimes

Was Ottke the only other champion out there during Calzaghe's tenure as Warren Boxing Champion? He defended 17 times before going for another belt (and winning it from Lacy), surely Sven wasn't the only fight out there??

I know it's ony Boxrec, but Calzaghe won the WBO in '97, Ottke only held the IBF till as late as 2002, presumably there were 2-3 other belts during this 5 year period Calzaghe could've challenged for rather than fight Pudwill, Thornberry, Sheika etc.

Super D Boon wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Personally I think you have to take Calzaghes longetivity with a pinch of salt. It highlights consistency at a high level, but realistic with Calzaghe this was just defending a WBO strap against mediocrity. Its not like he was undisputed reigning champion for 10 years.

I think its alot more impressive for Ward to unify his division, beat all his key rivals and establish himself as the best in the division in just a few yars than what Calzaghe did just defending a strap. Ward could easily do this if he just held onto his WBA belt and defended against mandatories for the next 6 years.

Unless Ward was to completely go to pot after unifying the division then I think its comfortably more of an acheivement.

We crdit Froch for his willinness to take on the best so the same must hld true for Ward and in some ways I think exonerating Calzaghes rather unambitious stretch as champion goes against this and advocaates avoiding rivals and failing to unify a division for a large period.

Realistically it would have been better for Calzaghe to unify SMW quickly in 3 years which he was well capable of and go on to better things than WBO mandatories for 6 years.

Absolute rubbish. Calzaghe's "pinch of salt" longevity would be the equivalent of him losing to Byron Mitchell or Omar Sheika. Lewis lost to even bigger dross he should have cleaned out first time. You still have to show up against your opponents and he fought enough decent fighters who could have put him out to dry if he hadn't have done.

Also Froch's "willingness" stems from him being signed to a competition that picks his fights for him.

I think a major problem with Calzaghe's reign at super middle was a limited German champion that refused to fight him. Not saying Calzaghe can be completely exhonerated for not making this fight happen but it was clear at the time that Ottke and his people had no real appetite for the fight. Apart from Ottke, Calzaghe fought pretty much everyone else relevant at super middle, so his longevity deserves a lot more than a pinch of salt. Maybe a mound of salt perhaps.

It took him a decade to do what Ward could potentially do in 3 years. Why should that be more impressive? Im not bowled over by Calzaghe ability to beat Starie, Pudwill, Thorneberry etc Pointless kind of fights that Ward should not be bothered with.

My point with the pinch of salt comment was that for the vast majority of Calzaghes tenure he was not undisputed as champion. He just held the WBO and his longetivity in part stems from a willingness to defend it against C list fighers.

The major issue with Calzaghes reign is not Ottke, it was just a willingness to face poor opposition for far too long.

I prefer the Froch/Ward way of doing things than the Calzaghe way and to say Froch or Ward only fight big fights because they signed into a tournament is giving them no credit whtsoever. Would you really prefer them to fight one ranked guy every two years in long but ultimately shallow reigns?