blonde poker forum

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/7873582.stm


The best British boxer ever?  I think so.

Phew for a minute i thought Audley Harrison or Danny Williams were hanging up their gloves

Certainly, there are a lot of people who say of Calzaghe "but who has he fought?" but those people just dont know boxing. Calzaghe was unlucky in that his career started just when TV boxing was no longer mainstream and Sky was the only place you could see it, which was fine for fight fans but bad for the wider, casual audience. Calzaghe battered everyone in his way, beat some great great fighters, had some amazing performances and seemed to get better with age. I have no doubt in my mind he was better than Eubank, Collins and Benn in their day (but what a fight they would have been) and funnily I think it was one of the best Eubank performances ever when Calzaghe beat him.

To retire undefeated in boxing is about as good as it gets in the sport.

Harrison has to go down as the worst British fighter of all time. Obviously there are plenty of people out there have have lost more fights, but for the hype, size advantage, apparent Olympic style skill and potential, he has to be the biggest dissapointment.

There's not really such a thing as 'retired' in boxing though is there?  Always bugs me these crap comebacks...

hell no, too many missed/ducked opportunities in his prime

Such as? He fought tooth and nail to fight Jones for years back when Jones was roided up.

There are some interesting comments on boxrec below is one of them:


<3 Calzaghe

I agree with all of that

Bollocks - his best win was against Lacey.

It's always the same, someone fights a great who is a bit older and "they're past their best", or they beat someone who is meant to be at the top and suddenly "they weren't as good as they were made out to be".

Calzaghe was the best in the division, if people didn't want to fight him, they were the ones avoiding the best.  Calzaghe struggled against Reid, but won the fight on points clearly imo.  Hopkins didn't beat Calzaghe either.

So I'll have to disagree with the poster on boxrec.

lol @ "his best win was against lacey"

might of been his most impressive but lol at it being his best, who was lacey when calzage beat him? a 20 fight undefeated guy that had fought nobody( except the amazing robin Reid who was clearly at his best at the time) ::) and then gone on to do absolutely nothing.

Carl Froch is the greatest. Surely?

::)

Going back to my first post, people do not realise how good some of Calzaghes opposition were simply because the casual boxing audience got alienated by Sky all the way through the last two decades. Previously everyone knew the boxers because they were on ITV and BBC, but Pay Per View TV robbed fighters like Calzaghe of 'Benn vs Eubank' type rivalries and when Joe battered his opposition, uninformed casual fans were left saying 'he beat a nobody' mistaking the fact they didn't know him for him not being a good opponent. Its only really the lighter weight divisions that have all these dream fights these days, because they contain all the Mexican and south american fighters that come with such amazing fan bases.

Jeff Lacy, going into his fight with Joe, had a similar aura to Mike Tyson with the US fight fans, he was a KO machine and Joe was a big underdog with the yank bookies. But because boxing is only just making its way onto mainstream tv again, and away from pay per view, nobody else knew how big an impact Lacy was having in world boxing.

Robin Reid - he should have had a rematch as it was correctly a split decision, but in fairness to Joe he did break his hand early in the fight.

Hopkins - anyone who says Hopkins was a has been when he lost to Joe clearly didn't see him twat Pavlik all over the place the other month. It was never a split decision, Hopkins gave up half way through and it would have been a terrible, and one sided, rematch.

Jones - yeah, deffo past his best but still similar age to Joe and not that old in 'ageing fight' terms because he never got hit. He ducked Joe for a decade, not the other way round.

As for all the big American fights, Joe was one of the most ducked fighters out there. he had been calling out the likes of Jones (He called him out as soon as he beat Eubank) and Hopkins for a decade, both fights had been confirmed many years ago only to have them cancelled. I agree he should have gone out there earlier to get the yanks buzzing, but I remember years and years of Joe complaining that nobody would fight him and how desperate he was for a big money, big opponent, dream fight.

People have very short memories when it comes to boxing and a lot of the time, the biggest detractors (especially British sports journalists) are the guys who only watch the marquee fights and never watch the undercards or the up and coming boxers, they simply are using their lack of knowledge against fighters like Calzaghe.

Mind you, he is welsh.....

No, he was born in London.

(But I wholeheartedly agree with the rest)

-1

 ;nemesis;

What Kin and Daveshoelace said. Shame really as I had £200 at evens that Calzaghe would beat Froch if they ever met with a mate, now there is a value bet!

You were probably lucky actually, Calzaghe is much better imo but he is at the point where he could age in boxing terms overnight as they always do, with every day that passes Froch has a better chance.

But evens is ridic valooooooo

I don't think you can blame Calzaghe for fighting people past their best. Lennox didn't fight Tyson/Holyfield in their prime and he's considered a legend. Boxing is like that sometimes.

He's pobably the best in the modern era going by his record but is down to the lack of depth in his weight class. Again, not his fault.

Would he have beaten Jones, Hopkins, Eubank, Benn or Watson in their prime had he been about a few years earlier? For most of those names I would guess at no.

lol, by who?

the guys a fuckin joke and wouldve got demolished by holyfield/tyson if he'd fought them in the 90's when he was plodding along doing fuck all fighting nobodys, then sport goes pearshaped and theres no one left half decent by 2000 so lennox steps up and says: "tyvm, i step up my game just a little bit and i think even i can be better that this load of shit thats about today" i can name 35 heavyweights from down the years that if lennox fought them when they were both at their best he wouldve got battered!!! maybe more! and he's considerd in the top ten of all time? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Lennox is a sporting hero of mine so I might be a bit biased here but he would have beaten Holyfield in the 80's 90's and 00's. Tyson would have been a tough fight for Lewis in the 80's but these discussions about x fighter vs y fighter in his prime are always meh imo. Lewis was the top dog in his division for a long time and even Riddick Bowe was scared to fight him at the beginning of his career. Also, it wasn't Lewis' fault that there were no Foreman, Norton, Fraiser or Ali around to prove his legacy...

Lewis was very good, in fact almost impossible to beat on his day, but I'm pretty reluctant to call him a 'great' or a 'legend'.

He had good skills, he was indeed ducked by many earlier in his career, he unified the titles and beat every fighter he ever faced.

But its mainly because he was just big - he was slow and lazy, but he was just the best big boxer out there. I think Tyson and Holyfield were two of the last great athletic, smaller heavyweights and Lewis was the first great big mother fucka, of which the division is now made up of. When he really tried, when he really put his mind to it, he was devastating, but most of the time he just cruised to victory, I think if he had been any other size he would never have made it as a boxer. Great for British Boxing, but way off the best ever list imo.

the punch that hasim Rahman(sp) knocked in out with(i think in SA)? wouldnt have even rocked the likes of Ali as a jab.

Definitely a top 10-15 all time heavyweight imo

Tyson was overrated. Lennox didn't really hit his peak until well into his 30's. Holyfield is probably my favourite out of the three as a fighter.

I wouldn't have Lewis anyone near my top 10 heavyweights of all time and I don't think many lists would. I have no doubt if you could have bottled the 80's Tyson that he would make the list but the fact is that his record is even worse than Lewis's for ever beating any great Heavyweight (Michael Spinks is probably the best on his record), Holyfield is the only who would get close to a top 10 for me.

None of them come close to the likes of Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Foreman, and Fraizer (Thats my top 8 fwiw)

Ali wouldn't stand a chance against modern day heavy weight boxers. It's an entirely different sport to what it was in Ali's day.

lol

gg mr calzaghe

[  ] Tom's post quality not dropped off recently... ::) ;)

Im gonna delete a few .... just because I can :)

I wouldn't say he wouldn't stand a chance but you have a point.

Its called Evolution.

Jack Johnson would beat any heavywieght fighting today

(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y260/Gooky/rolfcopter1.gif)

:-)

lololol (does that count?)

I can imagine if he were alive today what he wouldve thought of whats happend to the heavywieght division in the past 10 years? put him in the ring with that russian dude(the shit russian younger one of the brothers, cant remember their names) thats been hanging onto the title for ages now by jabbing and running every fight, shit scared to get hit and cant puch to save his life, Johnson would be like: "WTF bruv, this is a boxing match"? then he'd bowl up to him and knock him spark out. the guy used to fight 15-20 rounds, sometimes tiny litlle pads instead of gloves, none of these guys have got the power to hurt him, he was a beast of a guy, he'd roll over these mugs, no drama.

The heavyweight division should be renamed the lolweight division as it is so poor nowadays - poorest of all time?

This guy?

yep.

how is it possible not to get ONE, not one single new fighter in the past 10 years that looks like he can do anything half decent.

i know holyfield's been about, and some will argue for lennox but how is it physically possible that out of all the people in the world for so long now there hasent been a 18/19-20 year old come on the scene and tear things up, instead we've had to watch crap russian, shit south africains, over aged or just appaullingly bad Americains for so long, i just dont get how every other division has a superstar, a real world class fighter(some have several) yet theres been not one in a decade of heavyweight boxing IMO.

Am i missing something, something fundemental in the way America produces it's boxer nowadays, do they just not bother with heavyweights, are there sanctions on who can do what, is there something in the system that literally precludes them from turning out decent heavyweight fighters over there cos i just dont get what the reason is?

(http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2005/01/17/image667358x.jpg)

(http://aam.govst.edu/projects/rthompson/images/images_2/johnson_jeffries_boxing_fullsize.jpg)

(http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/ghost/images/photo_jack1940.jpg)

(http://www.nd.edu/~joycecol/exhibits/winkexhibit/JohnsonJ.710-18-77.jpg)

(http://www.first-jamaica.net/wp-content/themes/mimbo2.2/images/jack.png)

lol @ comparing how boxers from different generations would fare against one another.

ty, thats the point

how comical it should be is indicative of how bad the heavyweight division of today is that opens up the platform to even consider it.

All the athletic big guys in America would sooner play NFL or basketball where there is much more money. Yes there is money in boxing, but its very top heavy whereas there is loads of money in every level of the other big sports over there, so all the athletic guys aspire to play different sports these days and boxing is left with all the big fat slow fuckers.

I actually agree that someone like Jack Johnson would do well against, not necessarily dominate, the current crop of heavyweights, he would train for 15 rounds or more which a modern heavyweight would never ever come close to surviving in.

I'd like to put forward the argument that the heavyweight division has consistently had the poorest boxers in terms of skill and ability.  Of course there have been amazing, exciting fights in the heavyweight division - and there have been some special heavyweights.  But it's always been a division filled with over-weight, over-rated fighters who might have a big punch but aren't exactly 'pugilist specialists' (copyright Eubank).  It's the 'freak show division quite often, a spectacle.  Maybe this is why Ali stood out so much.

This. Ali was obv amazing, and Holyfield and Tyson were also prime skillful athletes who were more than just big bastards with a punch, that's about it for heavyweights in the last 40 years. Lewis was pretty good, but he was just a big bloke like the rest. I for one have rarely be entertained by heavyweight fights themselves, its just the drama that comes with them I have found exciting - Bruno finally winning a world title, tyson biting peoples ears, parachutes in the ring, Oliver McCall losing his mind in the ring, Golota vs Bowe and the riot that ensued etc etc - its the freak show that made it entertaining.

Now Barrera vs Morales 1 - that is entertaining boxing.

Tough call for me. I'd say Lewis makes my top 10 to be fair. I'm talking peak vs peak here, I can't see him losing to too many others from other generations. At his best (32-36) he was awesome. Completely controlling. I'd have Lewis over Foreman anyway.