The best

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

I agree with the below statement mentioned
"I have no problem with acknowledging that JC is the 3rd-5th best SM ever, behind Bhop, RJJ, Sugar Ray etc,"
As also said joes fitness was amazing and he was a great boxer but i still will never put him in front of the greatest and thats a prime RJJ.
joe and frank could have made a catchweight with him at anytime but he did not..RJJ was the best during these eras and easily played with future hall of famers hopkins and detroits finest james toney.

He took risks and went out of his comfort zone and weight class many times and proved he was a p4p
champ!
Joe was and is a great champion it definately proves that just cause your undefeated dont mean your the greatest..and that goes to floyd as well.
Long live RJJ, Ali and..and the best of all things british...nigel benn

---

Sugar Ray Leonard was not a great super middleweight. He would have got beaten by Joe Galzaghe, Toney and Roy Jones.

---

That was my post, not imps lol.
I acknowledge he would be giving up a lot to move up to SM, but he was a class act was Sugar, I dont think you can say all three would have beaten him, he would have decisioned one or two of them.

The difference being we know what Suagar Ray was capable of, but we dont know what JC could have done because he didnt do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Sorry Imp i dont think so he only had to beat Tony as he had beaten RJJ, how do think Ward and Froch will go.:sheep:

---

reverse the roles. Would a closer to peak RJJ 34 year old beat a 40 year old Calzaghe coming out of retirement? Of course he would.


I think therein lies a truth in the argument. I cant believe that anyone who has seen RJJ fight can think he wouldnt take Calzaghe in a fair fight.

I think Calzaghe did more then enough to get the win off Bhop and as for Hopkins his reign at Middle weight was damn near as bad as Calzaghes at supermiddle weight. I mean Hopkins still getting the big wins but at mw his best win is what Oscar or Trinadad and those guys did not belong that high at all. As for Jones he also had a fair share of weak fighters he beat up. I think you could argue Calzaghe as the top smw of all time but his atg is kinda hard to put he sure is not the greatest but he is one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Sorry Imp i dont think so he only had to beat Tony as he had beaten RJJ, how do think Ward and Froch will go.:sheep:

---

Stop talking crap fella.

No one is saying joe is not a great fighter but there is a great percentage of people that doubt alot of his choice in fighters and the risks he never took and the countless injuries he never sustained.

Any real boxing fan knows how invincible RJJ was in his prime he took the biggest risk of all by going up to heavweight then down to light heavy to win both belts..he paid for that weight loss in muscle but he was prepared to make history.

3years after joe mentions in his book that rj is past it he decides to fight him..couldnt even knock him out but he gets knocked down himself!

Ive never heard anyone say joe would take rj prime for prime..he was too busy ducking glen johnson and fighting the contender loser peter manfredo!!!

Go on, answer that one fella!

Mug.

Lol

One thing i love about ricky hatton he wasnt afraid to go overseas to fight the best..in his prime.

RJJ would've won nearly every round against JC IMO, but u can't say RJJ took risks with a straight face. Ruiz was a very calculated risk, other that what risks did he take? Going to Germany to fight Michaelchevski would've been a risk, but American fighters are immune for the criticism that British fighters are subject too, when not travelling to win or unify belts.

RJJ is top 10 p4p all time IMO, but a risk taker he was not and a good resume he does not have.

I like your response big h..but when your at the top of tree any fight is a risk.
Rjj took far more risks than joe..multi weight divison champion..and p4p number one for numerous years.

Hopkins, toney, harding, griffin,Johnson, ruiz etc..nah no risks
there..
Did joe even beat robin reid??
Sorry, joe dont do rematches!!?

I genuinely don't think JC's resume is any worse than B-Hop's (20 defences at MW) or RJJ's, fact is none if them ever went into a fight that they were expected to lose ( except maybe JC vs Kessler and Lacy)

Jc is def a pure boxer and a great one at that and would compete in any era!
I just think he is 2nd to roy..a great 2nd.

Well i not sure if i rank Jones at smw he was Lhw for most of his career so i have Calzaghe there right now at the top spot. I mean i rate fighter at were they stayed for most of there career but i see the point.

Glen johnson fight would have been just like, the Lacy fight a painfull beating there is not a lot to Johnson he's slow,Froch beat him easy and Carl's not fast Joe's record will be hard to beat;D:clap:

When you beat RRJ what more do you have to do ? nothing did he beat the man,YES HE DID.Joe get's put down doe's he get up yes did he beat ALL HIS OPPONENT'S. Anyone with half a brain if some people had one.Joe is up there with the best on i am repeating myself but some people seem to be a bit thick. :confused: In life we like some people and dislike other's the same with boxer's as the song go's here i go again 46 AND O and 3 ABA'S at differnt weight's.;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

When you beat RRJ what more do you have to do ? nothing did he beat the man,YES HE DID.Joe get's put down doe's he get up yes did he beat ALL HIS OPPONENT'S. Anyone with half a brain if some people had one.Joe is up there with the best on i am repeating myself but some people seem to be a bit thick. :confused: In life we like some people and dislike other's the same with boxer's as the song go's here i go again 46 AND O and 3 ABA'S at differnt weight's.;D

---

i dont think anyone has a problem with rating him in the best five SMs, so yes hes up there with the best.

HOwever the title of this thread is not 'with the best' or 'one of the best', its a cocky 'best' which takes liberties with the truth that he wasnt the best.
If the thread title was changed to one of the best, or 'the most accomplished SM champion' then noone would have an issue because that wouldnt be a lie.

Yes i cant go with what you say , but in this country we do not like a winner, and we should and there is nothing wrong with winner's is there ? and i think he is one of the best boxer's we have ever had. Can i say you can only fight who they put infront of you, and we can all nit pick with opponent's Duran Hagler Hearn's to name a few did not face some opponent weather they could or should have that's how it go's.;D:sheep: