The v2 Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Joe Calzaghe?

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Joe Calzaghe?

Post by aja424 on Thu 1 Dec - 1:06

First topic message reminder :

Joe Calzaghe.
Modern great?
A career full of stay busy fights after winning a title from a faded euro level world champion?
What's your take?

aja424

Posts : 731
Join date : 2011-03-18
Age : 41
Location : Nottingham

Back to top Go down


Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by bhb001 on Fri 2 Dec - 7:14

I can't hold Froch against Calzaghe, as he hadn't done enough at that stage to warrant a fight with Calzaghe. Going against a shot Jones and a reality TV star plus lots of mediocre opponents in the middle of his career has always been a disappointment to me, but there is no doubting that this was a great British boxer. He has a solid list of wins, but only Lacy, Kessler and (in hindsight) Hopkins showed how great he could be at his best

bhb001

Posts : 2675
Join date : 2011-02-16

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by milkyboy on Fri 2 Dec - 9:17

Yep, Froch was just a noisy neighbour. He did Carl a favour really by not dishing out a lopsided points defeat to him at that stage of his career.

milkyboy

Posts : 7754
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 9:22

I actually think Joe would of struggled with Froch at that stage of his career.

He was dropped in his last two fights. He probably still had too much speed and skill, but Froch would of been all over him like a cheap suit.

Yeah Joe is better prime for prime, but Froch is one strong determined f***er. I think he would definitely have pushed Joe.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by milkyboy on Fri 2 Dec - 9:24

hazharrison wrote:
milkyboy wrote:re hamed...&. there's a school of thought that hamed just couldn't cut it when he finally met an a-list operator and another that says if he still had ingle in his corner and his head screwed on the outcome might have been very different. We'll never know for sure, but personally I'm in the definitely a different fight, and likely a different outcome camp. But it's ifs and ands, record books say he lost comprehensively to the best fighter he fought.

As for JC, the record lacks quality, though it looks better in hindsight, as bhop resurrected his career. Watching their fight it seemed hard to believe that calzaghe would have won in bernards prime. Maybe that's a marker.

However, at his best he was a very difficult proposition for anyone. Fast hands, terrific work rate. He was also a brave fighter. For me guys who stand in the pocket and throw combinations, know they're in trouble if they miss and are always open to counters. He did that plenty with some big hitters. Always prepared to take 1 to land 2. My guess is against the true greats that asset might prove his downfall.

Re his other big name fights, Eubank was post prime, Reid is the black mark from a performance perspective. There are caveats with Lacey, although the performance was exceptional regardless, but the kessler fight (with home advantage) was an excellent win against an unbeaten and confident opponent.

Like alway, it depends where you personally draw the 'great' line. I suspect on record he falls just shy for me.

I think Hamed should have stayed at super bantam. Warren guided him towards Robinson because he was probably the easiest title holder to knock off at that point (with the likes of Barrera and Hector Acero Sanchez at 122 - from memory).

Hamed's motivation never seemed to be the same after Robinson. He made the mistake of getting his family involved in his management and gradually stopped listening to Ingle (while believing divine providence was bailing him out of fights). Compared to what he'd been, he looked rubbish against the likes of Medina, McCullough, Soto, Ingle etc. and it culminated in a Maidana vs Broner-type spanking against Barrera.

I think he'd have had a better career at 122 - and if he'd kept his mojo, would have been in the mix with Barrera, Morales, Jones and McKinney.

Yeh, No doubt his brothers involvement was detrimental to his performances, he got honeyghanitis getting fixated with blowing people away , the writing seemed on the wall from around the Kelly fight... cracking entertainment though it made!


Last edited by milkyboy on Fri 2 Dec - 9:31; edited 1 time in total

milkyboy

Posts : 7754
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 9:26

hazharrison wrote:
milkyboy wrote:re hamed...&. there's a school of thought that hamed just couldn't cut it when he finally met an a-list operator and another that says if he still had ingle in his corner and his head screwed on the outcome might have been very different. We'll never know for sure, but personally I'm in the definitely a different fight, and likely a different outcome camp. But it's ifs and ands, record books say he lost comprehensively to the best fighter he fought.

As for JC, the record lacks quality, though it looks better in hindsight, as bhop resurrected his career. Watching their fight it seemed hard to believe that calzaghe would have won in bernards prime. Maybe that's a marker.

However, at his best he was a very difficult proposition for anyone. Fast hands, terrific work rate. He was also a brave fighter. For me guys who stand in the pocket and throw combinations, know they're in trouble if they miss and are always open to counters. He did that plenty with some big hitters. Always prepared to take 1 to land 2. My guess is against the true greats that asset might prove his downfall.

Re his other big name fights, Eubank was post prime, Reid is the black mark from a performance perspective. There are caveats with Lacey, although the performance was exceptional regardless, but the kessler fight (with home advantage) was an excellent win against an unbeaten and confident opponent.

Like alway, it depends where you personally draw the 'great' line. I suspect on record he falls just shy for me.

I think Hamed should have stayed at super bantam. Warren guided him towards Robinson because he was probably the easiest title holder to knock off at that point (with the likes of Barrera and Hector Acero Sanchez at 122 - from memory).

Hamed's motivation never seemed to be the same after Robinson. He made the mistake of getting his family involved in his management and gradually stopped listening to Ingle (while believing divine providence was bailing him out of fights). Compared to what he'd been, he looked rubbish against the likes of Medina, McCullough, Soto, Ingle etc. and it culminated in a Maidana vs Broner-type spanking against Barrera.

I think he'd have had a better career at 122 - and if he'd kept his mojo, would have been in the mix with Barrera, Morales, Jones and McKinney.

I actually agree. I also think that Hamed fell for the Tyson trap too. He believed he was too strong and fast for everyone and fighters would be beat before the opening bell.

Hamed when he changed trainer, was doing different things and was really relying on his famed punch power.

Like Tyson, he is remembered for his potential and what really could of been. Both had a few great years and looked unbeatable, then they had their fall.


AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by milkyboy on Fri 2 Dec - 9:34

AdamT wrote:I actually think Joe would of struggled with Froch at that stage of his career.

He was dropped in his last two fights. He probably still had too much speed and skill, but Froch would of been all over him like a cheap suit.

Yeah Joe is better prime for prime, but Froch is one strong determined f***er. I think he would definitely have pushed Joe.

Fair point Adam, I think it's hard to say how much was a decline in joe that was age related or weight related or whether it was just the calibre of opponent.

milkyboy

Posts : 7754
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 9:44

Work rate and speed were probably still too much. Joe had a solid chin and great recovery, so even if Froch hurt him, Joe would likely recover.

Froch's best chance would be to attack like he did Bute. Unfortunately Joe isn't Bute and it wouldn't be enough.

If they had actually fought then, I would of seen Joe winning all the early rounds and Froch maybe starting to land after the midway stage. Calzaghe would of been hurt and possibly dropped, but he was too experienced to get finished off.

I would of liked to have seen this fight. It's a pity Froch wasn't on the scene a few years earlier. I guess the same can be said for Calzaghe with Eubank, Benn and Collins.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by milkyboy on Fri 2 Dec - 10:12

Froch was typically as slow starter, but the early rounds were when Jc was also vulnerable, so a Bute approach was probably Froch's best chance.

Jc won most of his fights pulling away at the end. Bar a Hail Mary, I don't see a way for Froch to win this prime v prime. By the time the fight could have happened his chances were likely better but still a longish shot for me.

milkyboy

Posts : 7754
Join date : 2011-05-22

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by BoxingFan88 on Fri 2 Dec - 10:14

milkyboy wrote:Froch was typically as slow starter, but the early rounds were when Jc was also vulnerable, so a Bute approach was probably Froch's best chance.

Jc won most of his fights pulling away at the end. Bar a Hail Mary, I don't see a way for Froch to win this prime v prime. By the time the fight could have happened his chances were likely better but still a longish shot for me.

Froch's feet were far too slow for Calzaghe

BoxingFan88

Posts : 3759
Join date : 2011-02-20

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 10:14

I definitely agree with you. Still a fight that would of been interesting.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Hammersmith harrier on Fri 2 Dec - 10:14

Despite being dropped a few times, I can't really remember Calzaghe being hurt in a fight aside from Brewer?

Hammersmith harrier

Posts : 12060
Join date : 2013-09-26

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Herman Jaeger on Fri 2 Dec - 11:11

I don't think we can go any higher than British great for either Calzaghe or Froch

Herman Jaeger

Posts : 3241
Join date : 2011-11-10

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by hazharrison on Fri 2 Dec - 11:16

You could argue a case for Calzaghe being a great fighter. Two weight lineal champion, unbeaten.

Froch, though, despite his excellent run of world class wins, didn't even champion 168 and lost to the two best fighters he faced (though he avenged the Kessler defeat). Might make the HOF - he has a good shot.

hazharrison

Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Mochyn du on Fri 2 Dec - 11:22

Calzaghe is an ATG. Not really a lot of doubt about it. 10 years + at the top, beat a number of quality fighters, never lost. Bottom end of top 100 ever for me.

Mochyn du

Posts : 152
Join date : 2016-03-09

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 11:27

hazharrison wrote:You could argue a case for Calzaghe being a great fighter. Two weight lineal champion, unbeaten.

Froch, though, despite his excellent run of world class wins, didn't even champion 168 and lost to the two best fighters he faced (though he avenged the Kessler defeat). Might make the HOF - he has a good shot.

Do you class Mayweather as a great fighter?? Just not sure sometimes and I know he is a 4 divisional lineal champ and unbeaten.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by hazharrison on Fri 2 Dec - 11:36

Mochyn du wrote:Calzaghe is an ATG. Not really a lot of doubt about it. 10 years + at the top, beat a number of quality fighters, never lost. Bottom end of top 100 ever for me.

Think that would class him as a great fighter rather than ATG (reserved for the Harry Grebs, Muhamad Alis of the world). Not that there's an official definition or anything but that's the general take on these things.

He wouldn't make a top 100 for me but he's probably in the argument.

hazharrison

Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Fri 2 Dec - 11:39

It's hard to put these things into numbers. Boxing fans take too much care about lists. I prefer to rate a fighter on a h2h basis, based on what I have seen. Same with any sport.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Fri 2 Dec - 13:14

milkyboy wrote:Froch was typically as slow starter, but the early rounds were when Jc was also vulnerable, so a Bute approach was probably Froch's best chance.

Jc won most of his fights pulling away at the end. Bar a Hail Mary, I don't see a way for Froch to win this prime v prime. By the time the fight could have happened his chances were likely better but still a longish shot for me.

I can see a way...Froch lands the bombs he landed on southpaw Bute and Groves..

Yes I'd pick Calzaghe but I wouldn't bet the house..

Mitchell decked him and I thought Reid beat him..

Froch is too readily written off...60/40 and no more in my opinion.

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 39275
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by catchweight on Fri 2 Dec - 17:14

I thought calzaghe was a terrific boxer. In his own era only second to jones jr between 168-175. A legitimate champion at 168 and 175.

catchweight

Posts : 4305
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by bhb001 on Mon 5 Dec - 7:20

Froch would have been a difficult fight for Calzaghe, but not a big one in terms of a world stage, which is why he went after Hopkins. I prefer Froch on many fronts, but still think Calzaghe had too much for him. I do think saying that Calzaghe "beat a number of quality fighters" is being kind to him given 4 or 5 truly quality fighters over a pretty long tenure (and I for one put Lacy in the quality fighters bracket. Superb performance from Joe).

bhb001

Posts : 2675
Join date : 2011-02-16

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Volcanicash on Wed 7 Dec - 18:16

I think its worth pointing out re lacy the signs were there about how much of a threat lacy really was.  In particular Lacy's Sheika win, who Calzaghe beat in 5 rounds, Lacy won a close decision etc.

Not taking away what was a good win, but with hindsight it shows how easy it is to get duped with the hype train for any fighter.

For me always found Joe entertaining, his career has a lot of shoulda woulda couldas about it, still think he should have fought froch post Jermain Taylor, but don't really blame him, as going out in vegas and madison square garden is a hell of a way to finish.  Should have made the jump from supermiddle to light heavy far sooner, distinctly remember him always complaining about making the weight so always found it difficult to understand why he left it so late, but overall you have to give credit while at the same time not be blinkered into bypassing the flaws in his career.

Volcanicash

Posts : 133
Join date : 2011-09-13

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Mochyn du on Mon 19 Dec - 17:00

Volcanicash wrote:I think its worth pointing out re lacy the signs were there about how much of a threat lacy really was.  In particular Lacy's Sheika win, who Calzaghe beat in 5 rounds, Lacy won a close decision etc.

Not taking away what was a good win, but with hindsight it shows how easy it is to get duped with the hype train for any fighter.


For me always found Joe entertaining, his career has a lot of shoulda woulda couldas about it, still think he should have fought froch post Jermain Taylor, but don't really blame him, as going out in vegas and madison square garden is a hell of a way to finish.  Should have made the jump from supermiddle to light heavy far sooner, distinctly remember him always complaining about making the weight so always found it difficult to understand why he left it so late, but overall you have to give credit while at the same time not be blinkered into bypassing the flaws in his career.

Thing is though whilst people trump this one out to tarnish the victory they forget that Lacy demolished Robin Reid in a lopsided beatdown only a couple of fights previously whilst Calzaghe of course only scraped past Reid.  It was certainly an impressive victory and I remember it being significant at the time.

Mochyn du

Posts : 152
Join date : 2016-03-09

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Volcanicash on Tue 20 Dec - 17:26

Mochyn du wrote:
Volcanicash wrote:I think its worth pointing out re lacy the signs were there about how much of a threat lacy really was.  In particular Lacy's Sheika win, who Calzaghe beat in 5 rounds, Lacy won a close decision etc.

Not taking away what was a good win, but with hindsight it shows how easy it is to get duped with the hype train for any fighter.
Volcanicash wrote:

For me always found Joe entertaining, his career has a lot of shoulda woulda couldas about it, still think he should have fought froch post Jermain Taylor, but don't really blame him, as going out in vegas and madison square garden is a hell of a way to finish.  Should have made the jump from supermiddle to light heavy far sooner, distinctly remember him always complaining about making the weight so always found it difficult to understand why he left it so late, but overall you have to give credit while at the same time not be blinkered into bypassing the flaws in his career.

Thing is though whilst people trump this one out to tarnish the victory they forget that Lacy demolished Robin Reid in a lopsided beatdown only a couple of fights previously whilst Calzaghe of course only scraped past Reid.  It was certainly an impressive victory and I remember it being significant at the time.

Not looking to tarnish the victory at all, it was impressive, just pointing out the hype that was Jeff Lacy was overstated, and there were signs for anyone who cared to look(At the time I didn't).  I also wouldn't say  Lacy  demolished Reid, and nor was it lopsided, I can recall it being a fairly messy but even fight until rounds 4 or 5 when the ref started assisting Lacy with point deductions and free punches.  Yes Lacy did look impressive in spurts, but it wasn't a win that stood out as a great victory to warrant the hype (mini mike tyson etc) by any means.

Volcanicash

Posts : 133
Join date : 2011-09-13

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Atila on Tue 20 Dec - 19:29

Why can't the win over Lacy be downplayed a little? The win over Hopkins has been upgraded over time due to what Hopkins went on to achieve after losing to Joe. But we are not allowed to take into account what Lacy has accomplished since losing to Calzaghe?


Last edited by Atila on Tue 20 Dec - 21:01; edited 1 time in total

Atila

Posts : 1586
Join date : 2011-06-03

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Herman Jaeger on Tue 20 Dec - 20:40

Good but not great Calzaghe

Greatness was thrashing Froch and slapping Bernard around in a rematch on home turf surely..

Herman Jaeger

Posts : 3241
Join date : 2011-11-10

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Wed 21 Dec - 10:17

Calzaghe is a British/Euro great. Not an ATG!

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Atila on Wed 21 Dec - 10:37

Joe was a great super middleweight champ. Which means more than being a British great. Not an ATG though.

Atila

Posts : 1586
Join date : 2011-06-03

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by AdamT on Wed 21 Dec - 10:40

Atila wrote:Joe was a great super middleweight champ. Which means  more than being a British great. Not an ATG though.

Fair point. He is among Trinidad and Mosley level of greatness. Perhaps Oscar too. Probably a bit behind these guys, but in that conversation.

He isn't among Floyd, Manny, Jones or Hopkins level of greatness. He could of been though. He had the talent to be among those guys.

AdamT

Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Herman Jaeger on Wed 21 Dec - 10:51

There's an argument that Calzaghe may have been a great fighter but he doesn't qualify for greatness on resume maybe he should have boxed on a couple more years I remember Froch was calling him out for a while

Herman Jaeger

Posts : 3241
Join date : 2011-11-10

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Mochyn du on Wed 21 Dec - 14:18

Atila wrote:Why can't the win over Lacy be downplayed a little? The win over Hopkins has been upgraded over time due to what Hopkins went on to achieve after losing to Joe. But we are not allowed to take into account what Lacy has accomplished since losing to Calzaghe?

Yes you can downplay that win in the same way you could downplay Chavez's best win against Meldrick Taylor, who whilst achieving more than Lacy after having his prime ripped out of him, was basically a shell of his former self after the 1990 bout.

I think the term "All Time Great" is largely subjective. I put Calzaghe in the lower reaches of the top 100 ever which to me would merit ATG status but to some others not so.

Mochyn du

Posts : 152
Join date : 2016-03-09

Back to top Go down

Joe Calzaghe? - Page 2 Empty Re: Joe Calzaghe?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum