Joe Calzaghe - A Modern Great

In 2008 I remember thinking Joe Calzaghe (46-0) was retiring prematurely as he brought down the curtain on an illustrious career that yielded no professional defeats and just 10 loss as an amateur. Indeed, some three and a half years later and this is an opinion that I still stand by. I am also of the opinion that if Joe Calzaghe was still boxing today then he would still have his unbeaten record intact.

When Calzaghe did retire I was surprised at the level of negativity that was placed at the door of such a gifted and entertaining fighter. I read countless articles from so called experts who considered that any sort of legacy would not be secured unless he fought the likes of Kelly Pavlik and Chad Dawson – some even suggested he was scared of them! I think it is important that in any argument you have to take stock of the evidence that you have before you can really provide an accurate debate and having watched the super middleweight division closely for the past couple of years I think the Calzaghe critics now owe him something of an apology.

The benchmark of this whole argument is the great Bernard Hopkins – a man that many people considered being nothing more than a "has been" when he and Calzaghe met at the Thomas and Mac Centre in Las Vegas. In the past fortnight; however, Hopkins became the Light Heavyweight World Champion by destroying Jean Pascal (he even had the energy to do some press ups before coming out for round 7) and prior to that he taught Kelly Pavlik a lesson and this was the man that Calzaghe had to beat in order to cement his legacy. Along with the fight against Hopkins, Pavlik’s performance against Lopez proves that he doesn’t have the ability to beat Calzaghe and the there is Chad Dawson. "Bad" Chad fought on the undercard of the Calzaghe versus Lacy bout and it was plain to see then that the boy had boxing ability in abundance. He had fast hands and feet and perfect balance; however, there is one thing lacking in Chad Dawson that will prevent him from ever being great – aggression. This makes him such a frustrating fighter to watch but as with everything in sport – you either you have it or you don’t and more often than not he has been found wanting when it matters. Based on the current evidence – his loss to Pascal in particular – it would be hard to consider that he could ever have beaten Joe Calzaghe. I will be intrigued to see how he performs against Hopkins – if he loses then he will have lost to the one man that Calzaghe received no credit for beating – which would confirm that Calzaghe had nothing to prove by fighting either of them.

The super middleweight division does not just stop with these three men; however. Indeed, before I have it pointed out to me Pascal and Hopkins are currently representing the light heavy weight division along with "Bad Chad". However, not long after Calzaghe retired I saw highlights of one of the best fights of 2008 – Froch v Pascal. This was fought at super middleweight and yielded Pascal’s first professional defeat and this brings me onto the Super Six tournament that is due to be concluded in the autumn. This tournament is designed to find the best Super-Middleweight fighter in the world by unifying the belts that were once owned by Calzaghe for so long. The favourite of that tournament was Kessler – who Calzaghe beat at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff. Arguably the most improved fighter of the tournament is Carl Froch – his performances have been nothing short of outstanding; however, he lost to Kessler and does not have any of the tools to beat Calzaghe – neither does Abraham, Taylor, or Dirrell – all of whom Froch has beaten. Simultaneously, neither Green nor Ward has the power to ever beat Calzaghe and their performances – although of a high standard (Green excluded) – are nothing compared to those displayed by Calzaghe against the likes of Eubank and Kessler. It might be worth adding; however, that the performances of Ward should not go unnoticed. Throughout the Super Six tournament he has show great ability; however, I believe that the constant barrage of punches that Calzaghe landed on his opponents he would cause Ward great difficulty and the level of power that he has demonstrated would not have caused Calzaghe any problems at all. Joe Calzaghe one of the most underrated boxers not only of this era but of all time.

Will try and get a reasoned response in before the thread degenerates as it inevitably will and say I agree but only to a degree. Personally think Joe was an exceptional talent and but for the march of father time have to give him the edge against any in the super six. However boxing is not only about talent it is about getting in there and proving your talent and unfortunately for far too long in his reign Joe was not really getting in the ring and doing it.

If we take his supermiddle weight reign his best five wins were probably Eubank, Lacy, Kessler, Reid and Mitchell. Whilst these are good wins, particularly the Kessler win the others are solid rather than spectacular and in the case of Eubank, Reid and Mitchell they were against guys who if not shot had probably seen better days. Couple that with a bunch of guys on his ledger such as Pudwill and Thornberry amongst others who should have never been within a 100 miles of a world title ring and you have to say pre Lacy Joe’s career was something of a disappointment. Also feel it is too easy to blame Warren for this, Joe was with him 10 years, if he wasn’t happy with the challengers he was being fed he had ample opportunity to fly the coup and so you have to interpret it as him giving his tacit approval to this career course in some sense.

However as you rightly say when he did finally start to get the big matches he comfortably proved he deserved to live in that company and his win over Hopkins whilst close looks better with every passing day. Overall it is ridiculous to say a two weight Ring magazine champion unbeaten in 46 fights is a bum as many would believe but for me I will always look back on his career with a sense of what might have been because he had the talent to have achieved far more than he did and to have racked up a good few more names on the ledger than he did.

Froch vs Pascal was at supermiddle weight, so Froch has every reason to call Calzaghe out, and Calzaghe had every reason to say no as he was the man at the time. I still say Calzagha had all the talent, none of the ambition.

I think Joe gets a hard time from many fans personally, Yes he could have done more and fought higher opposition but with the people he has beaten and the record he does have it is proof of his ability as a fighter. Regardless of the style of fighter he faced he always found a way to come through it and win, which is the best asset to have as a boxer imo that ability to grind out a win in any circumstance. He deserves more credit than he gets.

One thing I particularly liked about him was that whenever he got knocked down, which was not often he usually got up and finished the opponent off in that round. He was capable of upping his game at any point and that is what makes him so good.

Look Joe has retired and been out of the game for a bit so people are now begining to look back with fondness. Joe Calzaghe did well to stay undefeated for as long as he did but that does not change the fact that his record is more then questionable. The Americans are partly to blame for the hype surrounding Calzaghe as they would lap up a WHITE WORLD CHAMPION whenever they can, especially someone with Italian roots. The fact remains that for the most part of his career Joe travelled around Europe fighting Eurotrash never wanting to step up and test himself and never showing the determination to unify the title. He only stepped up late in his career and showed what he could have done earlier. His best wins were against Eubanks, Lacy and Kessler the rest is questionable and sometimes very poor. Joe Calzaghe is outside the top 10 super middleweights of all time. Froch is WAY above him now no doubt about it.

Joe Calzaghe is outside the top 10 super middleweights of all time.
_______________________________________________________

He isn't though is he.

All the criticism works pre Lacy. However when he fought Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins, he fought the best possible three fighters around his weight and beat them all. Not many can boast that.

Easy to be wise after the event re Lacy as well and say Lacy was never any good or was a hype job but at the time he was well fancied against Joe. Remember there was a poll of the writers on Secondsout and think something like 23 out of 24 picked Lacy, was pretty funny as they all wrote on after explaining how they got it so wrong. The revisionist history was everyone at the time considered Lacy a hype job waiting to be exposed when the evidence simply does not support this theory

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:All the criticism works pre Lacy. However when he fought Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins, he fought the best possible three fighters around his weight and beat them all. Not many can boast that.

He went from Lacy straight to Bika and that tour de force Manfredo Jr, beore getting back on track. Wasted at least a year. Again, bags of talent, but took too many easy options before Lacy, Kessler and, with hindsight, Hopkins

mckay1402 wrote:One thing I particularly liked about him was that whenever he got knocked down, which was not often he usually got up and finished the opponent off in that round. He was capable of upping his game at any point and that is what makes him so good.

Far from it. He was down four times if memory serves, and with the exception of Mitchell (who Calzaghe DID finish later in the same round-the 2nd), on the other three occasions the fights went the distance. In fact, only against Salem did Calzaghe score a knockdown; he didn't knock down either Hopkins or Jones Jr.

Not a fan of Calzaghe myself.

Thought he looked awful against Hopkins and didn't deserve the verdict.

The win against Jones is worthless.

His big performances / wins are against Lacey and Kessler. Were rightly seen as excellent wins and performances (at the time), but ...

All Time Great ? No, no way. Too little too late and I'd rank him alongside / just below Hamed as a modern British great.

Maybe he could have been up there with the likes of Hopkins, but he did not take the risks required. Staying at home, and playing it safe does not a great fighter make.

And claiming Hopkins wins by proxy for Calzaghe is idiotic.

fearlessBamber wrote:The win against Jones is worthless.

This much is quite true, compounded by the fact that in his very ordinary book, Calzaghe clearly states his opinion that RJJ is shot. He's a hypocrite.

fearlessBamber wrote:Maybe he could have been up there with the likes of Hopkins, but he did not take the risks required. Staying at home, and playing it safe does not a great fighter make.

To a certain extent this works both ways, so I think can't be treated as quite the blanket statement you've made it seem.

BALTIMORA wrote:...

fearlessBamber wrote:Maybe he could have been up there with the likes of Hopkins, but he did not take the risks required. Staying at home, and playing it safe does not a great fighter make.

To a certain extent this works both ways, so I think can't be treated as quite the blanket statement you've made it seem.

I don't think it does: Hopkins CV is full of big names. Sure he missed out on Calzaghe at a stage when the fight would have meant more to both of them, but it was Joe that missed out in terms if the chance to acquire a legacy boosting win.

These things are all relative, of course. A few observations, however:

1) Calzaghe is undeniably a British great - a consensus all-time top 10 pound for pound UK fighter, which puts him in elite company.

2) The super-middleweight division may be only about thirty years old, but Calzaghe is, in most people's judgements, one of the two or three most accomplished champions that the 168 lb class has seen so far.

3) No-one has ever talked of Joe in the same breath as the Grebs and Ezzard Charles figures of this world - that would patently be a step too far. He might have been more ambitious, could have fought different people, perhaps ought to have revved up his career a bit earlier. However, the record shows an extremely gifted boxer, until his hands systematically let him down, no mean puncher, and a man who ultimately gained universal recognition for his abilities.

Nitpicking is fine, and yes there may be a slight sense that Joe could have achieved still more, but his record will still look fairly smart to boxing fans fifty years hence. I'm prepared to bet that Joe won't stand too far outside the British all-time top ten boxers, even in 2061.

I'm prepared to bet that Joe won't stand too far outside the British all-time top ten boxers, even in 2061.
__________________________________________________________

Am equally as confident that we will still be having the same debates about him at that time.

Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

BALTIMORA wrote:Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

I guess that's true. However, if you happen to be American - as opposed to Swiss, say not travelling internationally is not so much of an issue.

BALTIMORA wrote:Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

But many fighters have done some travelling to promote their career. Haye, Hatton, Froch have all taken this route in recent times. Calzaghe did too little too late

fearlessBamber wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

I guess that's true. However, if you happen to be American - as opposed to Swiss, say not travelling internationally is not so much of an issue.

Codswallop. Unlike NBA, NFL and major league baseball, the world champions should be prepared to travel the world. The Yanks have no given right to fight from home all the time.

Michaels, Sean wrote:

fearlessBamber wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

I guess that's true. However, if you happen to be American - as opposed to Swiss, say not travelling internationally is not so much of an issue.

Codswallop. Unlike NBA, NFL and major league baseball, the world champions should be prepared to travel the world. The Yanks have no given right to fight from home all the time.

Apart from Andre Ward who has been bestowed the god given right to fight only a hundred paces from his couch for each and every super 6 fight!!

Michaels, Sean wrote:

fearlessBamber wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Bamber, I wasn't specifically on about Hopkins, just fighters in general. The boxers who are willing to travel wherever is necessary are few and far between.

I guess that's true. However, if you happen to be American - as opposed to Swiss, say not travelling internationally is not so much of an issue.

Codswallop. Unlike NBA, NFL and major league baseball, the world champions should be prepared to travel the world. The Yanks have no given right to fight from home all the time.

They don't have a right to fight at home, but when the big(ger) money is to be made in the States there's little incentive to travel abroad for fights. It's sound business sense, but it's a concept unique to boxing. Name me some other sports which have similar arrangements.

Sir. badgerhands wrote:
Apart from Andre Ward who has been bestowed the god given right to fight only a hundred paces from his couch for each and every super 6 fight!!

Does seem like America are giving one of their own every chance to win the touney.

Lake many its Calzaghe early years which are a let down, mainly due to the fact that he had proven he had the ability to take on the very best.

Ottke is the one I wish he would have took on in Germany. Even with the bias judging i feel he would have made it so one sided he would have stopped him mid/late or given Ottke's family members no choice but to announce him as the winner.

Calzaghe had a good start, a poor middle, and a great end to his career.

His win over Hopkins is looking better and better as Hopkins continues to dominate the best at 175.

His best wins were Kessler and Hopkins; his best performance Lacy.

That is an excellent 3 to have, to be fair.

i have and always will be a calzaghe fan, watched him from been a little lad, probably one of the first boxers i followed, the thing i always liked about calzaghe is he never gave up, backed down or shyed off, he always tryed to win every second of every fight, and i think this attitude was what won him some off his close decesions, and his punch rate was phenominal. he didn't have one punch KO power, but i think his punches carried more power than he was given credit for, especially his "slapping" flurries that he did on ocasion. he didn't get the big american fights until the end of his career, but i think the names he did get (kessler, hopkins, lacy, jones etc) are very impressive, and nobody unifys the belts and stays undefeated unless they deserve it.

He is a modern great...unbeaten at the top level for 10 years guarantees those lofty heights...

However he could've been greater and his Boxing legacy should read..

Could've, should've, would've..........didn't..

and it's a crying shame....modern great for sure..alltime great not so sure..

Puuuuuuuhleaaaaaaaaaase,

You children need a reality break, already.

Duuuuuuuuuudes Calslappy had three decent wins: Hopkins (debatable whether he actually won that), Kessler , and Eubank.

Lacy was a newbie nobody.

Eubank took the fight at late notice and had seen better days, BHop was already filling in his pension entitlement.

Mr Slappy deserves little respect for fighting Eurotrash for 10 years, yes, that's rights peeps, 10 yrs of sitting on his big old A, doing nowt.

No guts, no glory.

emancipator - universal sports correspondent
emanicpator - telling it how it is
emancipator - Intergalactic expert on tennis, boxing n everything alse

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO where for art thou, oh BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Ye may coooooooome baaaaaaaaaaaaack

Thouest isest forgivenest, oh BOOOOOOOO

Hello



Has anyone seen BOO?

ps. I'm also unbeaten in 46 fights, against my neighbour, his pet dog and the postman's goldfish

the goldfish was robbed

Yeah you're right, he was an old goldfish






BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

As a Froch fan have to take issue as the author claims Calzaghe would beat Froch.


They just can't leave Froch alone can they.


Carl wanted that fight for an enternity. But of course it would fall on deaf ears. Calzaghe beat everyone put in front of him? But of course Froch wasn't put in front of him. Not worthy you see. Nor was a prime Jones. Put in front of him that is.


Says that Hopkins beating Pascal is proof Pascal would lose to Calzaghe. At least Pascal had the confidence to give Hopkins a rematch. It's that right hand of Pascal's that would be the danger. Always felt that.


People say Calzaghe could have done more, but in truth he did about as much as he could with what he had. More would have been going to America and challenging a prime Jones. More would have been rematching Hopkins. More would have been fighting Froch after a long-running verbal feud. But deep down I suspect these are three fights he knew he wasn't sure he could win. And as we all know, he 'didn't like coming second.' Look at his best wins in Lacy, Kessler and Hopkins. The first two were tailored- straight up and down. And you don't see many repeats of the Hopkins fight, let's just leave it at that.


British great yes. Top ten perhaps a little generous. As for the last majority, he only took on fights he knew he could win. That marks him down for me. But hey top ten British ever, that's no mean feat.

Calzaghe as they would lap up a WHITE WORLD CHAMPION whenever they can, especially someone with Italian roots
................................
thats absolute tosh imo

Just imagine if Froch won the Super Six, all that good work he would have done, Joe could come back and take it all away. And then the game shows would be all his for the next thirty years.

Calzaghe was an excellent fighter no doubt, but nowhere alltime great status, best wins are against Eubank, Kessler & Hopkins & personally I thought he lost the Hopkins fight.
The rest of his record is mediocre, he spent far too long in the comfort zone for me, if Carl Froch beats Ward & Bute, you would have to rank him ahead of Joe!

Hey guys. Sorry to litter the board bt just wanted all you good 606 peeps to know i have just started a boxing blog of my own. I will be doing fight predicitons, recaps, boxing news, polls and plenty more once i get into the swing of it. Also (for the mods here) i plan to PROMOTE 606V2,(see my link to here from my site) i think we have some great posters on here so i will be flowing traffic this way too. The blog is new but i will be posting regularly and would be very happy to have any of you on there. One former 606er has found his way on there (he was a controversial figure on here but im hoping he keeps it clean on my site) before anyone asks i am NOT his alter ego. the site is

www.maineventboxing.wordpress.com

Would be great to have you aboard. so get signed up,or just visit from time to time folks