Joe Calzaghe P4P #1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Nope.
Pacs still #1.
The only way Joe will be #1 is IF Pac loses in Dec.

---

I've got it the other way around. Joe #1 now, Pac #1 if he beats Oscar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majesty

I was reading this and I thought of a point i'd like to ask you what to think.

Is someones p4p status in question if their biggest victories are always in question?

Because the only unmistakable uncriticized performance of Calzaghe was his domination of Kessler.

But there is always a but at the end of his other victories.

Roy Jones - Roy was past his prime and even then had Joe on dream street in the first round

Hopkins - Was a split decision and many felt Hopkins won

Lacy - american hype job that struggled against lesser competition that actually boxed him

Eubank - Eubank was weight drained and/or wasn't mentally the same fighter he was after the Watson fight.



Does it effect Joe's p4p status that most of his biggest wins have some sort of taint on them. Because imo p4p means you dominate everyone in their prime whether or not they are the hugest name. But that when it came to your biggest wins are against people in their prime. (Ray Leonard beat Hearns in his prime etc, Ali beat Foreman in his prime etc)

Hindsight is 20/20 but the only true credible prime Joe beat was Kessler, and I mean that in terms of no one questions it or criticizes Joe for it. Not like they do Lacy anyway.

If you look at someone like Pacquiao his biggest wins are almost never in question.

or if you look at Mayweather who's only question was against Castillo which he corrected later on.


Does this effect his ranking in p4p?

---

It's a joke when people take away credit for the victory over Lacy. Calzaghe was on another planet that night. Lacy was over-hyped, but i'd estimate that he was a much better fighter than he showed against Manfredo and Tsypko. The beating he took from Calzaghe was such that i doubt he's ever come close to recovering from it. Like i say, he was over-hyped but people shouldn't strip all the credit away from Joe just because they've decided to put their hindsight hat on. If Lacy had looked that poor in the fights leading up to the fight, why the hell did the vast majority of writers and experts pick him to KO Calzaghe?

And you say that many felt Hopkins won.......i'd imagine that many more thought Calzaghe won. I'd say Marquez's draw with pac was more questionable, as was Mayweather's win over Castillo (1st).

As for the Kessler fight. I actually said before the fight, that i hope to god Calzaghe doesn't do what he did to Lacy because he'd get happyslapped by all the hindsighters on here. Imagine how 'crap' kessler would have been if Joe had have given his very best performance in that fight.

Like i was saying though and like to hear a answer Ice do you fell that Pernell like Duran could wins titles at MW kinda same thing with Leonard winning the LHW title and Hearns winning CW titles i dont think Prenell could go up that much in weight and win yet again why I would put Duran, Leonard and Hearns above him when it comes to pound for pound.

Sober up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majesty

I was reading this and I thought of a point i'd like to ask you what to think.

Is someones p4p status in question if their biggest victories are always in question?

Because the only unmistakable uncriticized performance of Calzaghe was his domination of Kessler.

But there is always a but at the end of his other victories.

Roy Jones - Roy was past his prime and even then had Joe on dream street in the first round

Hopkins - Was a split decision and many felt Hopkins won

Lacy - american hype job that struggled against lesser competition that actually boxed him

Eubank - Eubank was weight drained and/or wasn't mentally the same fighter he was after the Watson fight.



Does it effect Joe's p4p status that most of his biggest wins have some sort of taint on them. Because imo p4p means you dominate everyone in their prime whether or not they are the hugest name. But that when it came to your biggest wins are against people in their prime. (Ray Leonard beat Hearns in his prime etc, Ali beat Foreman in his prime etc)

Hindsight is 20/20 but the only true credible prime Joe beat was Kessler, and I mean that in terms of no one questions it or criticizes Joe for it. Not like they do Lacy anyway.

If you look at someone like Pacquiao his biggest wins are almost never in question.

or if you look at Mayweather who's only question was against Castillo which he corrected later on.


Does this effect his ranking in p4p?

---

Calzaghe is unbeaten and been champ for over a decade. Lets post the question back at pac

Barrera - Clearly past his best. yet the commentary we got scored barrera as the winer.

Morales - Morales was washed up and beat Pac when he was coming off a loss to Barrera . Infact everytime Pac fought Erik, Erik was coming off a defeat . A fighter in his prime ? me thinks not

JMM - Everyone including the Filipino media had M,arquez winning that fight . Marquez should be 2-0 up

I would include a limited Diaz but we cant exactly count that as a big win and I cant think of any other big wins pac has had .

p4p #1 pompous ass, maybe.

Calzaghe beats to geriatrics and is number 1 ? lol

Calzaghe's accomplishments against senior citizens are great. But he needs to fight a couple of elite PRIME fighters to get to the top.

I would put him to numero uno if Pac losses this dec.

So were Kessler and Lacy both several years past their best then when Joe took their zeros ?

I guess Pac beat prime versions of Barrera and Morales even though both men were coming off losses when he met them .

Jones was done. So Calzaghe beating him doesn't do much for his p4p standing. He stays were he belongs. At number 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

So were Kessler and Lacy both several years past their best then when Joe took their zeros ?

I guess Pac beat prime versions of Barrera and Morales even though both men were coming off losses when he met them .

---

Give it a rest with the Pac-hate. Barrera, Morales, and Marquez are future HOFers. Lacy and Kesslers aren't. So there's no comparison there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James_Teja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

So were Kessler and Lacy both several years past their best then when Joe took their zeros ?

I guess Pac beat prime versions of Barrera and Morales even though both men were coming off losses when he met them .

---

Give it a rest with the Pac-hate. Barrera, Morales, and Marquez are future HOFers. Lacy and Kesslers aren't. So there's no comparison there.

---

Theres a huge difference between washed up legends and prime unbeaten world champs

okay how about Jones and Hopkins? They can be compared to Barrera and Morales , if not better and Hopkins has gone on to prove he isnt washed up .

People like you will never give Joe credit so its pontless talking about it .

yes but morales etc were all past there best... end of discussion..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James_Teja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

So were Kessler and Lacy both several years past their best then when Joe took their zeros ?

I guess Pac beat prime versions of Barrera and Morales even though both men were coming off losses when he met them .

---

Give it a rest with the Pac-hate. Barrera, Morales, and Marquez are future HOFers. Lacy and Kesslers aren't. So there's no comparison there.

---

Theres a huge difference between washed up legends and prime unbeaten world champs

okay how about Jones and Hopkins? They can be compared to Barrera and Morales , if not better and Hopkins has gone on to prove he isnt washed up .

People like you will never give Joe credit so its pontless talking about it .

---

I give Joe a credit. I said if Pac losses this dec, then I would put Joe on top. Pac is #1 simply because he fought tougher fights. He fought 20 times in the US and most of them against big names. He's got better resume than JoeCal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James_Teja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James_Teja

Give it a rest with the Pac-hate. Barrera, Morales, and Marquez are future HOFers. Lacy and Kesslers aren't. So there's no comparison there.

---

Theres a huge difference between washed up legends and prime unbeaten world champs

okay how about Jones and Hopkins? They can be compared to Barrera and Morales , if not better and Hopkins has gone on to prove he isnt washed up .

People like you will never give Joe credit so its pontless talking about it .

---

I give Joe a credit. I said if Pac losses this dec, then I would put Joe on top. Pac is #1 simply because he fought tougher fights. He fought 20 times in the US and most of them against big names. He's got better resume than JoeCal.

---

In your opinion . . . Then fair enough . Its my opinion that Joe has a much better resume and thats why we disagree

Joe is #1 right now. Easily. Manny is going to get destroyed by DLH. Watch out for Andre Berto in the near future.