Joe Calzaghe: Andre Ward is good but beatable

[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.

[erics44]

Hopkins didnt beat Calzaghe

He didnt win the fight

he didnt land enough punches, didnt throw enough to land them, didnt take a step forward

sometimes i can understand other sides to arguments in fights, that one there was no argument

if someone could show me any of the last 8 rounds where hopkins was on top for more than a single punch ill eat my words

[Dark Lord Al]

Hopkins didnt beat Calzaghe

He didnt win the fight

he didnt land enough punches, didnt throw enough to land them, didnt take a step forward

sometimes i can understand other sides to arguments in fights, that one there was no argument

if someone could show me any of the last 8 rounds where hopkins was on top for more than a single punch ill eat my words

Is Calzaghe your favorite fighter ?

[erics44]

Hopkins didnt beat Calzaghe

He didnt win the fight

he didnt land enough punches, didnt throw enough to land them, didnt take a step forward

sometimes i can understand other sides to arguments in fights, that one there was no argument

if someone could show me any of the last 8 rounds where hopkins was on top for more than a single punch ill eat my words

Is Calzaghe your favorite fighter ?

ha

nah he isnt that great

least i like some fighters tho eh?

[Dark Lord Al]

Hopkins didnt beat Calzaghe

He didnt win the fight

he didnt land enough punches, didnt throw enough to land them, didnt take a step forward

sometimes i can understand other sides to arguments in fights, that one there was no argument

if someone could show me any of the last 8 rounds where hopkins was on top for more than a single punch ill eat my words

Is Calzaghe your favorite fighter ?

ha

nah he isnt that great

least i like some fighters tho eh?

Tommy Hearns is my all time favorite , so it was just a simple question , sorry if the question offended you.

[Gandalf]

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.

All boxing debate is just opinion at the end of the day and I happen to believe Calzaghe is much better than Ward and that the only person to really prove a challenge would have been a prime Jones Jr. Just because you don't agree doesn't make it hyperbole. You just disagree.

I don't think Ward is terribly good, I think his style involves blatant cheating and his resume isn't all that hot either. All of those points can be backed up. I don't need hyperbole, the facts to support the opinions are there. Froch has a better resume than Andre Ward.

[FinitoElDinamita]

Ward and hopkins are from a similiar cloth.
They are savy fighters.. They are good, but not great.

[LobowolfXXX]

The older, heavier, latter day Hopkins is good. The Hopkins that went more than a decade without losing a fight and defending the 160-pound title a bazillion times was great.

[FinitoElDinamita]

The older, heavier, latter day Hopkins is good. The Hopkins that went more than a decade without losing a fight and defending the 160-pound title a bazillion times was great.

hopkins defended his mw titles against too many part time construction workers until he caught a former ww in Tito.

Based on your theory, Chris John is great too.

[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.

All boxing debate is just opinion at the end of the day and I happen to believe Calzaghe is much better than Ward and that the only person to really prove a challenge would have been a prime Jones Jr. Just because you don't agree doesn't make it hyperbole. You just disagree.

I don't think Ward is terribly good, I think his style involves blatant cheating and his resume isn't all that hot either. All of those points can be backed up. I don't need hyperbole, the facts to support the opinions are there. Froch has a better resume than Andre Ward.

I was going to assume that this was a self-deprecating joke about how ridiculous you were being before. Except that you're now continuing to be all butt-hurt about criticism of Calzaghe and are spouting off with more of the same hyperbole. It is truly bizarre how personally you are taking criticism of Joe Calzaghe.

No one picked Kessler to beat Calzaghe, btw. And it wasn't a "huge" fight outside of Europe. And please stop pretending that Lacy's shoulder is what made him average - the guy was a one-note power puncher with no skill, always. Cheers to Joe C for exposing that but exposing is all it was.

It's a shame that Calzaghe didn't fight Jones or Hopkins in their primes so we wouldn't need to engage in this. I think he gets completely outclassed by both. (And please stop pretending that the lost-twice-to-Jermain-Taylor, no power, no offense, 40-plus, version of Hopkins was somehow a bigger challenge than a circa-Tito Hopkins.) Just my opinion.

You have succeeded in making me think less of Calzaghe as a result of your spastic personally-involved responses to nearly every post in this thread.