**Wait no more here it is..... Markus Beyer vs. Mikkel Kessler (full fight)*

[CutMeMick]

Well, I didn't see Kessler rolling his shoulders and acting like a pure asshole. I think he has a great chance at beating Joe C.

He would have a clear shot at beating the Calzaghe that fought Bika...the Calzaghe that fought Lacy would TKO Kessler....

The 2 sides of Joe Calzaghe, I suppose!

OK.....wait I got question..........

At first I thought it was just the Zab Judah fans who made these whole 'The Zab that fought so and so would beat Bladomir....'

Now I'm hearing this again, and again....
Now lets not confuse this with someone being in their prime. Those are 2 different things.

Is it just me or does anyone else have a problem with this whole....
The Joe that fought Lacy or the Zab that fought Spinks....

I just dont get it, all of my fighters are just one it seems that theres a lot of fighters here who are triplets or something...
Erik is Erik, every fight you didnt hear me say the Erik that beat In Ji Chi would have beaten PAC in their second meeting.
Or the ODLH that beat Vargas would have beaten Mosley any day....


Somebody PLEASE explain this thing to me,
The Joe that beat Lacy would beat Kessler.....

No, It is very clearly the same fighter. Calzaghe against Lacy, Calzaghe against Bika...same fighter, but with very different approach and mindset during and prior to the fight IMO...

No excuses need to be made for Calzaghe, he has won all of his fights, but he has been known to fight down to the opponents level and brawl needlessly when he doesnt really need to do so...

Its unlikely he would do this against Kessler. As Calzaghe said before the Lacy fight. He can box or brawl, he is able to give us a different performance depending upon the opponent...

As simple as really...it aint rocket science...

OK I get that but thats pretty stupid.....
In that case for all of ODLH loses if the ODLH that fought Vargas would have fought all his fights he would have beaten everyone...
If the Duran that fought SRL I would have fought Kirkland Laing he would have destroyed him in 1 rd.
Fact of the matter is thats just a security blanket that people who couldn't accept a lost of their fav. fighter came up with......

Accept a loss or a bad performance for what it is, no excuses now like I said theres a huge difference when speaking of yrs./prime and all that other stuff but something thats happend in the same year thats just funny. A loss is a loss a bad performace is that a bad performance.

It's like saying the MAB that beat Rocky in their second match would box circles around PAC. :P
Thats nonsense regardless of what MAB was going through he lost and thats that.

You say its a security blanket to cover for a fighters loss, but I made the point very clearly that Calzaghe has never lost so there is no real need for any excuses...

If Calzaghe loses for a sloppy performance I will be the first to criticise, especially against a contender who isnt even highly ranked....but he hasnt...he has done what has needed to be done at all times in his career thus far.

Do you really think he would be as sloppy against Kessler? I dont, and if he loses its because Kessler beat him fair and square. If Calzaghe DOESNT raise his game and loses fair enough. If Calzaghe DOES raise his game and loses. Again, fair enough. But I doubt either eventuality is going to map out...

I see that I did put that in the 1st paragraph about accepting a loss but in the 2nd paragraph I put a loss or performance.
Fair enough..... I can accept that, I was one of the few here to praise Joe for hsi performace after he beat Lacy.
It was a great showing of skills & superiority.
cc. #707
for the talk.