Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
Also, with Tarver being a fellow southpaw would Calzaghe have had an even easier time with him?
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
First off Calzaghe didnt convincingly beat Hopkins it was a close shit fight, secondly that route of fighter a beating fighter b so he would be fighter c is flawed and quite silly really.
For my money prime for prime Calzaghe split decision.
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Yeh - close decison win for JC for me
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
skel1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
First off Calzaghe didnt convincingly beat Hopkins it was a close shit fight, secondly that route of fighter a beating fighter b so he would be fighter c is flawed and quite silly really.
For my money prime for prime Calzaghe split decision.
yep you are right about the fighter a beat fighter b shit being flawed, its not silly tho you can tell a lot from it in most cases
In my opinion Calzaghi did convincinly beat hopikins, after 4 rounds hopkins wasnt in the fight
but thats another debate
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
skel1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
First off Calzaghe didnt convincingly beat Hopkins it was a close shit fight, secondly that route of fighter a beating fighter b so he would be fighter c is flawed and quite silly really.
For my money prime for prime Calzaghe split decision.
yep you are right about the fighter a beat fighter b shit being flawed, its not silly tho you can tell a lot from it in most cases
In my opinion Calzaghi did convincinly beat hopikins,
after 4 rounds hopkins wasnt in the fight
but thats another debate
I agree with that, BUT, he was 5 points ahead after 4 round imo, so it was still close (on the cards)
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
skel1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
My money would have been on calzaghi
one route to look at is calzaghi convincing beat hopkins and hopkins convincingly beat tarver
Calzaghi was extremely fit, threw too many punches for tarver and in his prime had a solid chin
First off Calzaghe didnt convincingly beat Hopkins it was a close shit fight, secondly that route of fighter a beating fighter b so he would be fighter c is flawed and quite silly really.
For my money prime for prime Calzaghe split decision.
yep you are right about the fighter a beat fighter b shit being flawed, its not silly tho you can tell a lot from it in most cases
In my opinion Calzaghi did convincinly beat hopikins,
after 4 rounds hopkins wasnt in the fight
but thats another debate
I agree with that, BUT, he was 5 points ahead after 4 round imo, so it was still close (on the cards)
yep agreed, it was 8-5
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
It would have been a great fight. I like both fighters, prime for prime I would lean towards Calzaghe but Tarver was/is a far better and more acomplsihed fighter than most give credit. Borderline Hall of Fame imo.
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
What a bullshit headline. They've stole those quotes straight from twitter. Tarver was calling him out. Calzaghe laughed it off as all good banter.
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Joe beat the man that beat Tarver, so how could he argue that he was avoided by Joe. It would have been a food fight right after Tarver KO’ed Roy Jones and Tarver may have won then. However there paths did not cross when they were in the light heavy division unfortunately.
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
This old thread highlighted at the bottom sums up this bout. Calzaghe was getting slated for a Tarver fight in 2007 (same old hater usual suspects I see ;D)
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...ce-tarver.html
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Calzaghe all day long :rolleyes:. no contest .
Re: Calzaghe v Tarver - Who would have won.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
LOL looks like everyone wanted the Kessler fight, which happened and probably Joe's best victory.