IMO beating everyone you fought doesn't mean a great deal. The quality of the competition is almost everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legend
Otherwise one has to say Swen Ottke was the equal of Calzaghe ;)
Printable View
IMO beating everyone you fought doesn't mean a great deal. The quality of the competition is almost everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legend
Otherwise one has to say Swen Ottke was the equal of Calzaghe ;)
That's fine. Only judge fighters by whom they have fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiActually it is. One gets credit for the fights one actually has and none for the ones one doesn't. Everything else is excuses or rationalizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterHere is another major difference. Hopkins didn't leave America for one single fight during that period. Between 1994 and 2004 he fought 18 opponents. 16 were American based. 1 was Canadian. So the only guy travelling from outside North America was - Hakkar. An average French alphabet ranked no.1 contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiHere is one major difference. BHOP really did wreck the middles from 1994-2004 didn't he? Was there any obvious guy he didn't face? With JC at 168 the story just isn't the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYes it goes both ways homey. The same people shitting on JC, his resume, and fighting ability, mysteriously excuse Hopkins for everything else. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesand Calzaghe made his name beating up on has beens (Jones and Eubank) pretenders (Sheika, Bika and Manfredo Jr), or given gift decisions (Hopkins and Reid), his only stand out non controversial wins that deserve any real praise are his wins against Kessler and LaceyQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou're right Calzaghe should have played it like B-Hop, beat up blownup Welterweights to make a name for himself early in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest
You can argue who won the fight, but that whiteboy didn't make it easy for B-Hop. THis whole B-Hop won 4 or 5 more rounds is ridiculous.
as always it works both ways
Calzaghe lived in Britain.
Ottke lived in Germany.
Liles/Nunn/Echols lived in America (these are pretty poor choices really).
It's blatantly obvious that matching fighters from different countries is far more problematic than when everyone is operating in the same place. Especially when these fighters are posing as "world" champion with their different pieces of alphabet.
It's fine to say no excuses these guys should have met. But it's clearly not that simple.
But it's unfair to penalise fighters for failing to meet guys that didn't want to fight.
Sven Ottke's trainer, Ulli Wegner, has gone on record to state that Ottke never wanted anything to do with Calzaghe. There were numerous attempts to make this fight. So Calzaghe deserves to be forever downplayed because a man REFUSED to fight him?
Sure. His resume with a win over Ottke would have been better, right? His resume with a win over Liles? better still. Echols? better yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterThat's fine. Only judge fighters by whom they have fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiActually it is. One gets credit for the fights one actually has and none for the ones one doesn't. Everything else is excuses or rationalizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterHere is another major difference. Hopkins didn't leave America for one single fight during that period. Between 1994 and 2004 he fought 18 opponents. 16 were American based. 1 was Canadian. So the only guy travelling from outside North America was - Hakkar. An average French alphabet ranked no.1 contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiHere is one major difference. BHOP really did wreck the middles from 1994-2004 didn't he? Was there any obvious guy he didn't face? With JC at 168 the story just isn't the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYes it goes both ways homey. The same people shitting on JC, his resume, and fighting ability, mysteriously excuse Hopkins for everything else. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesand Calzaghe made his name beating up on has beens (Jones and Eubank) pretenders (Sheika, Bika and Manfredo Jr), or given gift decisions (Hopkins and Reid), his only stand out non controversial wins that deserve any real praise are his wins against Kessler and LaceyQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou're right Calzaghe should have played it like B-Hop, beat up blownup Welterweights to make a name for himself early in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest
You can argue who won the fight, but that whiteboy didn't make it easy for B-Hop. THis whole B-Hop won 4 or 5 more rounds is ridiculous.
as always it works both ways
Calzaghe lived in Britain.
Ottke lived in Germany.
Liles/Nunn/Echols lived in America (these are pretty poor choices really).
It's blatantly obvious that matching fighters from different countries is far more problematic than when everyone is operating in the same place. Especially when these fighters are posing as "world" champion with their different pieces of alphabet.
It's fine to say no excuses these guys should have met. But it's clearly not that simple.
But it's unfair to penalise fighters for failing to meet guys that didn't want to fight.
Sven Ottke's trainer, Ulli Wegner, has gone on record to state that Ottke never wanted anything to do with Calzaghe. There were numerous attempts to make this fight. So Calzaghe deserves to be forever downplayed because a man REFUSED to fight him?
If it is ONE guy? Doesn't matter much as a single win can't usually change a lot in terms of resume. It is when, off the top of one's head one can come up with 5-6 that one starts to say hmmmmm.
Let's not forget, I'm not arguing Calzaghe wasn't a great fighter. The issue is how great? That's pretty rarified air and comp matters a great deal doesn't it?
Sure. But you can do that with virtually any fighter in history. There's always someone else they should have fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiSure. His resume with a win over Ottke would have been better, right? His resume with a win over Liles? better still. Echols? better yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterThat's fine. Only judge fighters by whom they have fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiActually it is. One gets credit for the fights one actually has and none for the ones one doesn't. Everything else is excuses or rationalizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterHere is another major difference. Hopkins didn't leave America for one single fight during that period. Between 1994 and 2004 he fought 18 opponents. 16 were American based. 1 was Canadian. So the only guy travelling from outside North America was - Hakkar. An average French alphabet ranked no.1 contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiHere is one major difference. BHOP really did wreck the middles from 1994-2004 didn't he? Was there any obvious guy he didn't face? With JC at 168 the story just isn't the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYes it goes both ways homey. The same people shitting on JC, his resume, and fighting ability, mysteriously excuse Hopkins for everything else. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesand Calzaghe made his name beating up on has beens (Jones and Eubank) pretenders (Sheika, Bika and Manfredo Jr), or given gift decisions (Hopkins and Reid), his only stand out non controversial wins that deserve any real praise are his wins against Kessler and LaceyQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou're right Calzaghe should have played it like B-Hop, beat up blownup Welterweights to make a name for himself early in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest
You can argue who won the fight, but that whiteboy didn't make it easy for B-Hop. THis whole B-Hop won 4 or 5 more rounds is ridiculous.
as always it works both ways
Calzaghe lived in Britain.
Ottke lived in Germany.
Liles/Nunn/Echols lived in America (these are pretty poor choices really).
It's blatantly obvious that matching fighters from different countries is far more problematic than when everyone is operating in the same place. Especially when these fighters are posing as "world" champion with their different pieces of alphabet.
It's fine to say no excuses these guys should have met. But it's clearly not that simple.
But it's unfair to penalise fighters for failing to meet guys that didn't want to fight.
Sven Ottke's trainer, Ulli Wegner, has gone on record to state that Ottke never wanted anything to do with Calzaghe. There were numerous attempts to make this fight. So Calzaghe deserves to be forever downplayed because a man REFUSED to fight him?
If it is ONE guy? Doesn't matter much as a single win can't usually change a lot in terms of resume. It is when, off the top of one's head one can come up with 5-6 that one starts to say hmmmmm.
Let's not forget, I'm not arguing Calzaghe wasn't a great fighter. The issue is how great? That's pretty rarified air and comp matters a great deal doesn't it?
Does that mean you should ignore valid reasons for fights not happening? Bit harsh...
However, I do agree Calzaghe's record would look far better with a win over Ottke ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44are you saying ottke would have beaten calzaghi?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think it would of been a 50-50 fight. I know the current public perception is to knock Ottke. But really most that do really only seen youtube clips of him. But the man was not a bad fighter. Anybody that thinks he gets blown out by Calzaghe really doesn't know the sport.
I mean, I kinda like what Hulk said initially; Hopkins is only making Hopkins good... However, I will say that as things have panned out at 175 over the past 3 or 4 years, I actually have more faith that Joe could of made a much bigger impact at the weight if he wanted to.
I mean Dawson, Pascal, Hopkins, Adamek, Green, Woods, Tarver, Johsnon & Erdei are all feasibly Calzaghe victims at some point... I wouldn't of been so convinced right after the Hopkins fight. But my view on this division has definitely changed somewhat.
Ottke was cute and crafty. It's easy to hate on him but he was effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44are you saying ottke would have beaten calzaghi?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think it would of been a 50-50 fight. I know the current public perception is to knock Ottke. But really most that do really only seen youtube clips of him. But the man was not a bad fighter. Anybody that thinks he gets blown out by Calzaghe really doesn't know the sport.
Also, the 2nd Veit fight happened after supposedly Calzaghe was all out of options.
Lastly, whenever Joe speaks, it's always apparent that his logic isn't exactly linear. Much like his boxing style ;D
I am harsh from the safety of my keyboard!Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterQuote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiSure. His resume with a win over Ottke would have been better, right? His resume with a win over Liles? better still. Echols? better yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterThat's fine. Only judge fighters by whom they have fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiActually it is. One gets credit for the fights one actually has and none for the ones one doesn't. Everything else is excuses or rationalizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterHere is another major difference. Hopkins didn't leave America for one single fight during that period. Between 1994 and 2004 he fought 18 opponents. 16 were American based. 1 was Canadian. So the only guy travelling from outside North America was - Hakkar. An average French alphabet ranked no.1 contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiHere is one major difference. BHOP really did wreck the middles from 1994-2004 didn't he? Was there any obvious guy he didn't face? With JC at 168 the story just isn't the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYes it goes both ways homey. The same people shitting on JC, his resume, and fighting ability, mysteriously excuse Hopkins for everything else. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesand Calzaghe made his name beating up on has beens (Jones and Eubank) pretenders (Sheika, Bika and Manfredo Jr), or given gift decisions (Hopkins and Reid), his only stand out non controversial wins that deserve any real praise are his wins against Kessler and LaceyQuote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou're right Calzaghe should have played it like B-Hop, beat up blownup Welterweights to make a name for himself early in his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest
You can argue who won the fight, but that whiteboy didn't make it easy for B-Hop. THis whole B-Hop won 4 or 5 more rounds is ridiculous.
as always it works both ways
Calzaghe lived in Britain.
Ottke lived in Germany.
Liles/Nunn/Echols lived in America (these are pretty poor choices really).
It's blatantly obvious that matching fighters from different countries is far more problematic than when everyone is operating in the same place. Especially when these fighters are posing as "world" champion with their different pieces of alphabet.
It's fine to say no excuses these guys should have met. But it's clearly not that simple.
But it's unfair to penalise fighters for failing to meet guys that didn't want to fight.
Sven Ottke's trainer, Ulli Wegner, has gone on record to state that Ottke never wanted anything to do with Calzaghe. There were numerous attempts to make this fight. So Calzaghe deserves to be forever downplayed because a man REFUSED to fight him?
If it is ONE guy? Doesn't matter much as a single win can't usually change a lot in terms of resume. It is when, off the top of one's head one can come up with 5-6 that one starts to say hmmmmm.
Let's not forget, I'm not arguing Calzaghe wasn't a great fighter. The issue is how great? That's pretty rarified air and comp matters a great deal doesn't it?
Sure. But you can do that with virtually any fighter in history. There's always someone else they should have fought.
Does that mean you should ignore valid reasons for fights not happening? Bit harsh...
However, I do agree Calzaghe's record would look far better with a win over Ottke ;)
Two things a person can always count on in life. They will one day die. And two, Calzaghe will have some kind of excuseQuote:
Originally Posted by Jimanuel BoogustusOttke was cute and crafty. It's easy to hate on him but he was effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44are you saying ottke would have beaten calzaghi?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think it would of been a 50-50 fight. I know the current public perception is to knock Ottke. But really most that do really only seen youtube clips of him. But the man was not a bad fighter. Anybody that thinks he gets blown out by Calzaghe really doesn't know the sport.
Also, the 2nd Veit fight happened after supposedly Calzaghe was all out of options.
Lastly, whenever Joe speaks, it's always apparent that his logic isn't exactly linear. Much like his boxing style ;D
A more factual answer to your point would be.They will die ,and two,Calzaghe never lost a pro fight in his life.FACT!Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseTwo things a person can always count on in life. They will one day die. And two, Calzaghe will have some kind of excuseQuote:
Originally Posted by Jimanuel BoogustusOttke was cute and crafty. It's easy to hate on him but he was effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44are you saying ottke would have beaten calzaghi?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think it would of been a 50-50 fight. I know the current public perception is to knock Ottke. But really most that do really only seen youtube clips of him. But the man was not a bad fighter. Anybody that thinks he gets blown out by Calzaghe really doesn't know the sport.
Also, the 2nd Veit fight happened after supposedly Calzaghe was all out of options.
Lastly, whenever Joe speaks, it's always apparent that his logic isn't exactly linear. Much like his boxing style ;D
No way Ottke beats Joe on a neutral venue and judges. Joe beat better fighters and the fighters they had in common he beat them more convincingly. Joe does have himself to blame by not mixing with the best earlier in his career and causing the first loss for the Germain.
Like him or not Calzaghe finished his career at 46-0, something few Champions can lay a claim to. He did things his way, and I respect him for that, he made a shitload of money, retired with all his marbles, and can laugh at his critics all the way to the bank and IBHOF.
Good job Joe. :)
Ottke retired 34-0. Including an amazing 22-0 in championship fights. He made just as much if not more money than Calzaghe and he too has all his marbles. Yet you criticize him. Fucking hypocrite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars_ax
Where in this thread have I said anything about, or criticized Ottke? I barely know who Ottke is, and as far as calling me a fucking hypocrite, go suck a big one you fucking moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseQuote:
Originally Posted by Mars_ax
Ottke retired 34-0. Including an amazing 22-0 in championship fights. He made just as much if not more money than Calzaghe and he too has all his marbles. Yet you criticize him. Fucking hypocrite.
Internet "bad-asses" like you are a dime a dozen, fucking kids trying to act tough.
you also forgot to mention that he blew a hell of alot of that money on blow and you wont be shocked if guys like Hopkins laugh all the way till Calzaghe has to return to the ring to make another buck cause he's flat broke, don't be surprised if Joe ends up having to pull a stint like Whitaker, Camacho, Gomez, and all the other snorters have just to get a buck since they blew away what they had wonQuote:
Originally Posted by Mars_axWhere in this thread have I said anything about, or criticized Ottke? I barely know who Ottke is, and as far as calling me a fucking hypocrite, go suck a big one you fucking moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseOttke retired 34-0. Including an amazing 22-0 in championship fights. He made just as much if not more money than Calzaghe and he too has all his marbles. Yet you criticize him. Fucking hypocrite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars_ax
Internet "bad-asses" like you are a dime a dozen, fucking kids trying to act tough.