Re: Calzaghe and Hopkins go at it about who's got the better resume
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Oh please Reid and Woodhall did have 1 fight after there bad losses, but they were gimme fights against journeyman fighters. They were still coming off bad losses unless you count Reid's win over 8-6 fighter or Woodhalls win over 29-9 fighter :rolleyes:
And i did see Woodhall vs Beyer and yes it was reasonably close, but the fact that Woodhall was dropped 3 times by a non puncher like Beyer spoke volumes that Woodhall was past his best and his punch resistance wasn't there anymore, and plus he didn't looked good at all, even Woodhall himself said he performed terrible.
And if you actually watched Reid vs Malinga you would know Reid looked terrible and it was embarrassing how he was easily outboxed by a 42 year old wasn't it ??
And yes i can say with a straight face that Tito at that time was a much bigger threat than Reid coming off losing to a grandad, or Woodhall coming off being dropped multiple times by a non puncher, or Eubank coming in as a late replacement, or Mitchell going life and death with Manny Siaca twice. Tito was a top 10 P4P fighter and if you actually look back without hindsight i think your find Tito was the big favorite, remind me was any of the Calzaghe opposition you mentioned favorites ??
One last thing i don't need boxrec because i have Calzaghe's career set, and i've seen pretty much all of his fights.
That's the point I'm Making, they weren't BAD CAREER ENDING LOSSES, Woodhall said he performed badly yet still pushed a future long reigning champion all the way. Calzaghe was taking these fights against Reid, Woodhall, Mitchell who were coming off close decision losses or robberies at world title level, they were all high risk fights considering how little he was payed compared to the much lower risk de la Hoya fight for Hopkins.
Tito was favourite due to fan ignorance, just as Lacy was. The warning signs were there, Trinidad dropped by welterweights and Lacy 1 dimensional, yet the majority (me included) sub concsiously ignored this due to their exciting fights. Anyway the 'favourite' discussion is irrelevant, it all depends on perception of the fans at the time of the fights, while Trinidad may have seemed risky to the fans, Hopkins and his camp didn't see it that way.
Anyway, I'm leaving this discussion now, I'm a big fan of both fighters and I see no point in disparaging their resumes, you can pick holes in every single resume in history if you choose to.
Re: Calzaghe and Hopkins go at it about who's got the better resume
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bomp
That's the point I'm Making, they weren't BAD CAREER ENDING LOSSES, Woodhall said he performed badly yet still pushed a future long reigning champion all the way. Calzaghe was taking these fights against Reid, Woodhall, Mitchell who were coming off close decision losses or robberies at world title level, they were all high risk fights considering how little he was payed compared to the much lower risk de la Hoya fight for Hopkins.
Tito was favourite due to fan ignorance, just as Lacy was. The warning signs were there, Trinidad dropped by welterweights and Lacy 1 dimensional, yet the majority (me included) sub concsiously ignored this due to their exciting fights. Anyway the 'favourite' discussion is irrelevant, it all depends on perception of the fans at the time of the fights, while Trinidad may have seemed risky to the fans, Hopkins and his camp didn't see it that way.
Anyway, I'm leaving this discussion now, I'm a big fan of both fighters and I see no point in disparaging their resumes, you can pick holes in every single resume in history if you choose to.
You can pick holes in any fighters resume, but you don't need to look very hard to find the holes in either Calzaghe's or Hopkins's. Compare either guy to Lennox Lewis, RJJ, or PBF.
Re: Calzaghe and Hopkins go at it about who's got the better resume
I take some of the points made in this thread, but Tito KO'ed a very good middleweight before he went into that Nard fight and he was undefeated.
Nard has more recognised names on his record, but I'd say Joe has faced as many if not more legit threats to his throne.
The most difficult opponent on either record is Kessler IMO.
Both records have worked on some major padwork though.
It'll all be irrelevent when Joe beat Nard anyway. ;)
Re: Calzaghe and Hopkins go at it about who's got the better resume
they both have good records, hopkins is a bit better
they both seem good in the interviews........... theres alot of personal niggle in this so it should be a good fight
Re: Calzaghe and Hopkins go at it about who's got the better resume
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Ok here are the examples.
Robin Reid shortly before Calzaghe fight was outboxed by a 40+ Thulani Malinga.
Richie Woodhall shortly before Calzaghe fight was dropped 3 times by Markus Beyer.
Charles Brewer shortly before Calzaghe was stopped in 3 by Antwun Echols.
Chris Eubank was a late replacement and only had a very short time to lose the weight and get in fighting shape, roughly about 1 week wasn't it ??
I HAVE TO AGREE WITH ALL THAT ICE IS SAYING ON THIS SUBJECT.
