Joe Calzaghe: Andre Ward is good but beatable

[Violent Demise]

I think the opinion was that if Froch won the super six, his legacy would be better than that of Calzaghe. This was a thread we discussed in depth , well didnt Ward win the super six ?

Ward beat a much better opposition than Calzaghe , how can Mr Play it safe find fault with Ward.
Isnt a fool wise after the event.

Who though? I really don't see anyone on Ward's resume that is better than the best fighters on Calzaghe's resume. It doesn't make any sense.

You dont think Ward has fought better opposition than Calzaghe at the same stage of their respective careers ?

Calzaghe - Eubank, Reid, Woodhall, Veit, Sheika

Ward - Green, Abraham, Froch, Kessler, Miranda

There isn't all that much in it. Eubank was faded, so was Kessler. People are going to remember Green and Miranda just as much as they do Sheika and Woodhall. Abraham and Veit are your token popular in Germany fighters. Reid was a good fighter though never going to go down as a great, a bit like Froch who only beat a well faded Reid.

The only difference was Calzaghe was busier and had more filler.

You mean had alot of defences against club fighters ?

Sheika had lost to Tony Booth for fucks sake.

Yet beaten Glen Johnson.

The Glen Johnson, Calzaghe was deadly afraid to face.

[LobowolfXXX]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

[BIG H]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

Actually mate, your comment is 'The Myth' - this is a point that has been debated over and over on here. You tell me who Calzaghe should've fought at 168, that was operating at 168 at that time, and that the reason they didn't fight was JC!!

Andplease don't say Liles, Echols, Mundine and all that old blurb.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

I think Hopkins had to dig deep against Calzaghe, mentally. It look at one point like he'd begun to loose interest but managed to fight very competitively in the championship rounds basically levelling things out.

Mayweather during something like rounds 2 to 4 was looking pretty heated by Ricky's constant proximity before he adjusted.

Ward was underpressure more in the last 12 rounds than any other round so of course mentally, given frochs reputation, it's gonna disturb you a bit. I assumed Ward would of had him all figured out but I guess your prone to wilt a little when you've been doin everything right for 85% of the fight and you suddenly realise it just stopped working.

Calzaghe definately has a superior mentality in that respect because indeed he can rise from a knockdown, hurt and still say 'I'm better than you' and just go out swinging. To want to out 'Roy Jones' Roy Jones himself and to just be audacious in the ring. He looked lost against Hopkins untill he started to outwork and harass him. But that's Hopkins. A man who since 2004 had been on Eco mode... Just doesn't reflect what Andre Ward is capable of doing in the ring.

[LobowolfXXX]

Kessler would get beaten more decisively in a second fight with Ward than he did in the first.

[Gandalf]

Kessler would get beaten more decisively in a second fight with Ward than he did in the first.

Opinion and nothing else.

[LobowolfXXX]

Kessler would get beaten more decisively in a second fight with Ward than he did in the first.

Opinion and nothing else.

As is all of your speculation about what would happen in a second Ward-Kessler fight, or what would have happened in a hypothetical Ward-Calzaghe fight.

[shza]

Kessler would get beaten more decisively in a second fight with Ward than he did in the first.

Opinion and nothing else.

Hilarious, coming from you. In this thread.

Miles, you are taking this way too personally and exaggerating to an extreme to compensate.

Hopkins "turned out to be an easy win" for Calzaghe? Ward is not really very good? You don't need to jump to this kind of out-and-out hyperbole to make your point. It comes off as (and is, really) pure provocation and not even an attempt to persuade anyone to agree with you. Just like in the Manny/JMM threads.

Personally, I thought the old, Jermain Taylor-losing version of Hopkins still shaded a decision against Calzaghe. Plenty of others agree. But I'm not going to claim it was "decisive" or "easy" or pretend I can't conceive of how anyone could possibly see it any other way. Or call it a "robbery." If you score workrate above absolutely everything else, even if it's ineffective pitter-pat, you have to score the fight for Calzaghe (though still close on the cards -- not "easy").

Same with the Calzaghe-Ward point. Here, I'm generally inclined to agree that, at this point, Ward is just too young and unproven to pick in this mythical matchup. But 5 years from now? We'll see. Not out of the question. No need to completely denigrate the guy and basically say he's a completely average fighter except that he's good at clinching in order to conclude or argue that the bout favors Calzaghe at this point.

[LobowolfXXX]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

Actually mate, your comment is 'The Myth' - this is a point that has been debated over and over on here. You tell me who Calzaghe should've fought at 168, that was operating at 168 at that time, and that the reason they didn't fight was JC!!

Andplease don't say Liles, Echols, Mundine and all that old blurb.

I didn't say anything about "the reason" Calzaghe didn't fight them; but the fact is, he didn't. Again, just pick up a Ring Magazine during the Calzaghe era. You'll see lots of names in the top-5 that Calzaghe never fought. Sorry, I missed the earlier debates, but why are supposed to ignore Echols and Mundine? They were #s 3 and 4 in the 2003 and 2004 annual rankings, when Calzaghe was defending against people like Kabary Salem and Mger Mkrtchyan. But those are hardly the only names. Look at Calzaghe's record, and look at the names of the people in the top 5 during his time as a top 168-pound champion and contender.

Ward is 27, and he's beaten three of the top 5 in the weight class, and four of the top 10.

[BIG H]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

Actually mate, your comment is 'The Myth' - this is a point that has been debated over and over on here. You tell me who Calzaghe should've fought at 168, that was operating at 168 at that time, and that the reason they didn't fight was JC!!

Andplease don't say Liles, Echols, Mundine and all that old blurb.

I didn't say anything about "the reason" Calzaghe didn't fight them; but the fact is, he didn't. Again, just pick up a Ring Magazine during the Calzaghe era. You'll see lots of names in the top-5 that Calzaghe never fought. Sorry, I missed the earlier debates, but why are supposed to ignore Echols and Mundine? They were #s 3 and 4 in the 2003 and 2004 annual rankings, when Calzaghe was defending against people like Kabary Salem and Mger Mkrtchyan. But those are hardly the only names. Look at Calzaghe's record, and look at the names of the people in the top 5 during his time as a top 168-pound champion and contender.

Ward is 27, and he's beaten three of the top 5 in the weight class, and four of the top 10.

OK, so you tell me who these people are and which ones enhance his legacy?

Woodhall, Reid, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Brewer, Bika are not all time greats, but were all (except Bika) either current or very recent world champions. To say that Echols or Mundine (or the others you are going to tell us) would've changed your view on his resume doesn't make sense. Fact is, it wasn't a great era, B-Hop and RJJ were not fighting at SMW (there were to busy creating far worse resume's than Calzaghe in their own respective weight classes ) and other than Ottke, who was utter shite, there was nobody else to fight that he didn't fight.

[LobowolfXXX]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

Actually mate, your comment is 'The Myth' - this is a point that has been debated over and over on here. You tell me who Calzaghe should've fought at 168, that was operating at 168 at that time, and that the reason they didn't fight was JC!!

Andplease don't say Liles, Echols, Mundine and all that old blurb.

I didn't say anything about "the reason" Calzaghe didn't fight them; but the fact is, he didn't. Again, just pick up a Ring Magazine during the Calzaghe era. You'll see lots of names in the top-5 that Calzaghe never fought. Sorry, I missed the earlier debates, but why are supposed to ignore Echols and Mundine? They were #s 3 and 4 in the 2003 and 2004 annual rankings, when Calzaghe was defending against people like Kabary Salem and Mger Mkrtchyan. But those are hardly the only names. Look at Calzaghe's record, and look at the names of the people in the top 5 during his time as a top 168-pound champion and contender.

Ward is 27, and he's beaten three of the top 5 in the weight class, and four of the top 10.

OK, so you tell me who these people are and which ones enhance his legacy?

Woodhall, Reid, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Brewer, Bika are not all time greats, but were all (except Bika) either current or very recent world champions. To say that Echols or Mundine (or the others you are going to tell us) would've changed your view on his resume doesn't make sense. Fact is, it wasn't a great era, B-Hop and RJJ were not fighting at SMW (there were to busy creating far worse resume's than Calzaghe in their own respective weight classes ) and other than Ottke, who was utter shite, there was nobody else to fight that he didn't fight.

I'm not saying they have to be all-time greats, but most of the people Calzaghe defended the title against weren't top-ten in the weight class. In the last 2 1/2 years, he stepped up his level of competition dramatically, but in the first 7+ years, his defenses weren't remotely against the best 168-pounders. They just WEREN'T. Don't extrapolate anything from that other what it is, or what his legacy would have been if he fought X, Y, or Z. I'm just stating a plain, verifiable, almost indisputable fact. For over 7 years, the top SMWs were passed over as Calzaghe defended mostly against 2nd and 3rd tier guys. I'm not talking about P4P greats; I'm just talking about the top 168-pounders of that era.

I agree with Gandalf that all boxers have some filler, but what other boxers do is irrelevant to the question of whether he cleaned out the division. He just didn't. And if you look at the Ring Magazine rankings of their eras (which are not perfect, but are at least Better than the corrupted sanctioning body rankings), it's apparent that Hopkins, overall, defended against a higher class of challenger. Which, of course, doesn't mean that Hopkins was better than Calzaghe. But it's still true (that he defended against better challengers, that is).

[LobowolfXXX]

Hopkins, as 160-pound champion, has a better resume than Calzaghe as 168-pound champion.. The "far worse resume" bit is nonsense.

[BIG H]

Firstly, with respect to anyone who thinks that a second Froch-Ward fight would go any differently, Froch doesn't even think he could beat Ward. He's already said that he's the second-best 168-pounder, and that nobody can beat Ward at 168.

Secondly, it's a myth that Calzaghe cleaned out the 168-pound division. He beat many good fighters, but there were A LOT of top contenders that for one reason or another, he never took on. Pick up a random Ring Magazine from the Calzaghe era, and you'll see a lot of names in the top-5 of the 168-pound division that Calzaghe never got in the ring with. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't have beaten them; but it's just patently false that he beat all of the big names in the division.

Thirdly, since the Calzaghe fight, with the exception of the Ward fight, Kessler is 5-0 (4), including a solid win against the division's #3. So it's bullshit to discount Ward's victory by saying that Kessler is somehow markedly worse than he was against Calzaghe; it's just that Ward made him LOOK bad. The 2011 Ward is better than ANY year's Kessler, and Calzaghe, while he beat him decisively, hardly "destroyed" him. To say that Ward hasn't done against anyone else the types of things that he would need to go to beat Calzaghe misses the point; it doesn't imply that Ward is incapable of doing those things. He just hasn't needed to do them against anyone else. What Ward has shown is that to date, he can do whatever is needed to beat the people put in front of him. That doesn't mean that he necessarily would be able to adjust successfully against Calzaghe, but there's no particular reason to think that he wouldn't, either. IMO, 2011 Ward vs. (insert your favorite 168-pound year here) Calzaghe would be a close, competitive, and highly entertaining fight.

Actually mate, your comment is 'The Myth' - this is a point that has been debated over and over on here. You tell me who Calzaghe should've fought at 168, that was operating at 168 at that time, and that the reason they didn't fight was JC!!

Andplease don't say Liles, Echols, Mundine and all that old blurb.

I didn't say anything about "the reason" Calzaghe didn't fight them; but the fact is, he didn't. Again, just pick up a Ring Magazine during the Calzaghe era. You'll see lots of names in the top-5 that Calzaghe never fought. Sorry, I missed the earlier debates, but why are supposed to ignore Echols and Mundine? They were #s 3 and 4 in the 2003 and 2004 annual rankings, when Calzaghe was defending against people like Kabary Salem and Mger Mkrtchyan. But those are hardly the only names. Look at Calzaghe's record, and look at the names of the people in the top 5 during his time as a top 168-pound champion and contender.

Ward is 27, and he's beaten three of the top 5 in the weight class, and four of the top 10.

OK, so you tell me who these people are and which ones enhance his legacy?

Woodhall, Reid, Mitchell, Lacy, Kessler, Brewer, Bika are not all time greats, but were all (except Bika) either current or very recent world champions. To say that Echols or Mundine (or the others you are going to tell us) would've changed your view on his resume doesn't make sense. Fact is, it wasn't a great era, B-Hop and RJJ were not fighting at SMW (there were to busy creating far worse resume's than Calzaghe in their own respective weight classes ) and other than Ottke, who was utter shite, there was nobody else to fight that he didn't fight.

I'm not saying they have to be all-time greats, but most of the people Calzaghe defended the title against weren't top-ten in the weight class. In the last 2 1/2 years, he stepped up his level of competition dramatically, but in the first 7+ years, his defenses weren't remotely against the best 168-pounders. They just WEREN'T. Don't extrapolate anything from that other what it is, or what his legacy would have been if he fought X, Y, or Z. I'm just stating a plain, verifiable, almost indisputable fact. For over 7 years, the top SMWs were passed over as Calzaghe defended mostly against 2nd and 3rd tier guys. I'm not talking about P4P greats; I'm just talking about the top 168-pounders of that era.

I agree with Gandalf that all boxers have some filler, but what other boxers do is irrelevant to the question of whether he cleaned out the division. He just didn't. And if you look at the Ring Magazine rankings of their eras (which are not perfect, but are at least Better than the corrupted sanctioning body rankings), it's apparent that Hopkins, overall, defended against a higher class of challenger. Which, of course, doesn't mean that Hopkins was better than Calzaghe. But it's still true (that he defended against better challengers, that is).

And yet again, I ask "Who are these people?" Give me names!!

[Fenster]

I'm not saying they have to be all-time greats, but most of the people Calzaghe defended the title against weren't top-ten in the weight class. In the last 2 1/2 years, he stepped up his level of competition dramatically, but in the first 7+ years, his defenses weren't remotely against the best 168-pounders. They just WEREN'T. Don't extrapolate anything from that other what it is, or what his legacy would have been if he fought X, Y, or Z. I'm just stating a plain, verifiable, almost indisputable fact. For over 7 years, the top SMWs were passed over as Calzaghe defended mostly against 2nd and 3rd tier guys. I'm not talking about P4P greats; I'm just talking about the top 168-pounders of that era.

You are totally wrong.

Brewer, Mitchell, Reid and Woodhall were all top 10 Ring ranked during this period (see links at bottom).

And for what it's worth - Tocker Pudwill replaced Thomas Tate (top 10 rated) who pulled out two weeks before the fight. And for what it's worth - Cazlaghe stopped Glenn Catley (top 10 rated) in the amateurs.

So as you can see - it's a plain, verifiable, almost indisputable fact that Calzaghe WAS NOT passing over all the top supermiddles.


The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: Super Middleweight--1990s - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: Super Middleweight--2000s - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

The only thing i can say about Hopkins is that he could of fought a large number of supermiddleweights/ lightheavyweights from basically anypoint in his career but didnt.

Not entirely sure why.