Joe Calzaghe under the micoscope

[Rantcatrat]

Calzaghe BEAT Hopkins. That must count for something, no? He beat the man that beat the men - that supposedly could equal his achievements.

Calzaghe beat a FORTY THREE YEAR OLD Hopkins. By a close points decision. After getting knocked down.

Please don't be confused. Hopkins dominating Pavlik says more about what Pavlik is NOT, than what Hopkins (at 43) is.

With all due respect, that "man that beat the man" argument is seriously flawed. Unless you are prepared to anoint Junior Jones as an ATG. Because he also "beat the man who beat the man".

41-year-old Hopkins EASILY beat Tarver.

42-year-old Hopkins COMFORTABLY beat Winky.

43-year-old Hopkins was BEATEN by Calzaghe.

43-year-old Hopkins THRASHED Pavlik.


TWO fights prior to Calzaghe, Hopkins age WAS NOT a factor in beating class fighters. After he was BEATEN by Calzaghe his age WAS NOT a factor in defeating Pavlik. Fact.

So.. why is his age a factor in the Calzaghe LOSS?

Pavlik beat JT twice. JT beat Bernard. Pavilk beats Hopkins? Nope. Logic doesn't work.

Calzaghe is a first ballot hall of famer. 21 consecutive title defenses merits respect and adulation. Guy is a great. Does his resume leave something to be desired? Absolutely. Furthermore, if Kessler continues to fight bums and turns out to be all hype when he faces someone good, Calzaghe's resume will look weaker.

If Jones beats Calzaghe (and I don't think he has a shot), how will Calzaghe's resume look?