I love Joe Calzaghe!

[Bomp]

#1 Pavlik is not my hero, but he is a fighter I respect. He takes on all comers. There should be many more like him.

#2 Joe has shown indications of preferring the safe route. On top of that he feeds complete and utter bullshit to the press in the hopes to promote his current fight he has lined up. Contradicts himself left and right in his quest to go out in, this is his own words mind you, a "Blaze Of Glory". The guy is a fruitcake plain and simple. I cannot believe I used to respect that turd.

Pavlik may very well lose soon, maybe even against Hopkins, but at least he is approaching his craft with old fashioned honor and dignity and willing to test himself.

Yeah right.

Pavliks last two fights have been against a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds and a guy not even good enough to win a British title, who took the place of the fearsome and deadly John Duddy!!!

Now he is facing a Calzaghe victim in ancient old Bernard Hopkins - at 170. Avoiding Arthur Abraham and conveniently IGNORING the supermiddleweights - Kessler and Bute. All the while chasing another OLDMAN in no-hands Calzaghe.

Stop kidding yourself with the Kelly Pavlik throwback spiel. Pavlik wants the oldboys for the MONEY!!! He is no different to any other modern fighter with the potential to EARN. If guided CAREFULLY enough he might last a while. Fact.

I'll defend Pavlik's last two fights. Lockett, I'll give you, that was just a fight to keep Pavlik in the ring and in shape. Taylor the second time was an unavoidable fight. They previously both knocked each other down, the linear title switch hands, and went through arguably the fight of the year, a rematch was a no-brainer. With all those factors, like I said, the rematch was unavoidable not "a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds."

About facing Bernard Hopkins: First off, Pavlik never wanted this fight, his promotion company set this up and Kelly just went along with it. When it's all said and done, he just takes the fights that are given to him. NO ONE WANTS to fight Hopkins because he makes people look ugly. Abraham, Kessler, etc will still be there in a year so he's not ducking anyone. Hopkins and Calzaghe aren't going to be around for as long so why not fight them now while they're still here. Pavlik wants Calzaghe, and being impressive against Hopkins will make that fight closer to happening. PLUS! He makes way more money fighting Hopkins or Calzaghe than fighting Abraham and Kessler. Even though he initially didn't want the fight against Hopkins, looking at it this way makes sense in order to get Calzaghe in the ring.

If Kelly isn't a throwback fighter than I don't know who is. Like I said earlier, he doesn't choose his opponents, his promoter does and he just trains and fights. Look at De La Hoya, Mayweather, Pacquiao and other boxers of that stature. Those guys have a say in who they fight but Kelly doesn't deal with it that way. He's a fighter and nothing more...

Zertuche, Miranda, Taylor, Taylor, Lockett, Hopkins in two years is not "protected" if you ask me...

SOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo
#

When Calzaghe faces some duff opposition, but also includes the three fighters all his critics wanted him to face he is called a ducker/diver/pussy, yet when Pavlik fights 'whoever
his promoter puts in front of him' he's called a take on anyone anywhere throwback wtf??

You use your ignorance of european fighters to convenientl;y back up your arguments. Lockett is a god awful opponent for a world champion to face, he's lower than the duffs Calzaghe faced (Pudwill, Ashira) the BIG difference is that those guys were late replacements for higher caliber fighters while Lockett was a choice made 2 months prior to the fight, while the other guys on the shortlist were also below top level in Duddy and Rubio.

I have NO problem with Pavlik. He is what he is, an outstanding athlete (+very exciting fighter-good for the sport) who has plenty of time to secure a legacy if he turns out to be good enough. But if you think he's already there with the likes of Calzaghe/Hopkins in terms of legacy then I'd like to know what you're smoking cos it must be good. He's had victories over 1 world class opponent, the same opponent JC was criticised for courting cos he was 'ducking' Kessler. The same opponent who openly refused to fight the 'legend' that is Carl Froch.
you have to prove yourself against all styles to be a true great. He may yet do this.



Mr140: I'm sure you will forget about JC in ten years time, that's what unkowledgable people do, stick their heads between their legs, and lick their own anus until all the bad thoughts that disprove their theories leave their heads.

[smashup]

The Old guard in full effect....
Bomp n Fenster

[Deanrw]

Yeah right.

Pavliks last two fights have been against a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds and a guy not even good enough to win a British title, who took the place of the fearsome and deadly John Duddy!!!

Now he is facing a Calzaghe victim in ancient old Bernard Hopkins - at 170. Avoiding Arthur Abraham and conveniently IGNORING the supermiddleweights - Kessler and Bute. All the while chasing another OLDMAN in no-hands Calzaghe.

Stop kidding yourself with the Kelly Pavlik throwback spiel. Pavlik wants the oldboys for the MONEY!!! He is no different to any other modern fighter with the potential to EARN. If guided CAREFULLY enough he might last a while. Fact.

I'll defend Pavlik's last two fights. Lockett, I'll give you, that was just a fight to keep Pavlik in the ring and in shape. Taylor the second time was an unavoidable fight. They previously both knocked each other down, the linear title switch hands, and went through arguably the fight of the year, a rematch was a no-brainer. With all those factors, like I said, the rematch was unavoidable not "a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds."

About facing Bernard Hopkins: First off, Pavlik never wanted this fight, his promotion company set this up and Kelly just went along with it. When it's all said and done, he just takes the fights that are given to him. NO ONE WANTS to fight Hopkins because he makes people look ugly. Abraham, Kessler, etc will still be there in a year so he's not ducking anyone. Hopkins and Calzaghe aren't going to be around for as long so why not fight them now while they're still here. Pavlik wants Calzaghe, and being impressive against Hopkins will make that fight closer to happening. PLUS! He makes way more money fighting Hopkins or Calzaghe than fighting Abraham and Kessler. Even though he initially didn't want the fight against Hopkins, looking at it this way makes sense in order to get Calzaghe in the ring.

If Kelly isn't a throwback fighter than I don't know who is. Like I said earlier, he doesn't choose his opponents, his promoter does and he just trains and fights. Look at De La Hoya, Mayweather, Pacquiao and other boxers of that stature. Those guys have a say in who they fight but Kelly doesn't deal with it that way. He's a fighter and nothing more...

Zertuche, Miranda, Taylor, Taylor, Lockett, Hopkins in two years is not "protected" if you ask me...

SOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo
#

When Calzaghe faces some duff opposition, but also includes the three fighters all his critics wanted him to face he is called a ducker/diver/pussy, yet when Pavlik fights 'whoever
his promoter puts in front of him' he's called a take on anyone anywhere throwback wtf??

You use your ignorance of european fighters to convenientl;y back up your arguments. Lockett is a god awful opponent for a world champion to face, he's lower than the duffs Calzaghe faced (Pudwill, Ashira) the BIG difference is that those guys were late replacements for higher caliber fighters while Lockett was a choice made 2 months prior to the fight, while the other guys on the shortlist were also below top level in Duddy and Rubio.

I have NO problem with Pavlik. He is what he is, an outstanding athlete (+very exciting fighter-good for the sport) who has plenty of time to secure a legacy if he turns out to be good enough. But if you think he's already there with the likes of Calzaghe/Hopkins in terms of legacy then I'd like to know what you're smoking cos it must be good. He's had victories over 1 world class opponent, the same opponent JC was criticised for courting cos he was 'ducking' Kessler. The same opponent who openly refused to fight the 'legend' that is Carl Froch.
you have to prove yourself against all styles to be a true great. He may yet do this.



Mr140: I'm sure you will forget about JC in ten years time, that's what unkowledgable people do, stick their heads between their legs, and lick their own anus until all the bad thoughts that disprove their theories leave their heads.

Joe has some good wins, he has some bad ones. Same as Pavlik. My main issue with Joe is he seems to be determined at every opportunity to try to discredit Pavlik as a possible opponent, when pure common sense dictates that he is THE opponent everyone wants for Joe.

Lockett was a mandatory and Pavlik was coming off two tough fights and needed an easy win. I will give him the coaster fight, but only one. If he does more, he gets on my shitlist also.

I respect guys like Froch, Abraham etc, as they want to get in there. Froch has a big mouth yes, but he is also willing to try backing it up. That is cool in my book.

All I want to see is the best available fight each other. That is it, nothing more and nothing less. I could really care less of who wins or loses, but to me, they just need to happen.

[C-Lo]

Yeah right.

Pavliks last two fights have been against a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds and a guy not even good enough to win a British title, who took the place of the fearsome and deadly John Duddy!!!

Now he is facing a Calzaghe victim in ancient old Bernard Hopkins - at 170. Avoiding Arthur Abraham and conveniently IGNORING the supermiddleweights - Kessler and Bute. All the while chasing another OLDMAN in no-hands Calzaghe.

Stop kidding yourself with the Kelly Pavlik throwback spiel. Pavlik wants the oldboys for the MONEY!!! He is no different to any other modern fighter with the potential to EARN. If guided CAREFULLY enough he might last a while. Fact.

I'll defend Pavlik's last two fights. Lockett, I'll give you, that was just a fight to keep Pavlik in the ring and in shape. Taylor the second time was an unavoidable fight. They previously both knocked each other down, the linear title switch hands, and went through arguably the fight of the year, a rematch was a no-brainer. With all those factors, like I said, the rematch was unavoidable not "a guy he previously blasted out in 7 rounds."

About facing Bernard Hopkins: First off, Pavlik never wanted this fight, his promotion company set this up and Kelly just went along with it. When it's all said and done, he just takes the fights that are given to him. NO ONE WANTS to fight Hopkins because he makes people look ugly. Abraham, Kessler, etc will still be there in a year so he's not ducking anyone. Hopkins and Calzaghe aren't going to be around for as long so why not fight them now while they're still here. Pavlik wants Calzaghe, and being impressive against Hopkins will make that fight closer to happening. PLUS! He makes way more money fighting Hopkins or Calzaghe than fighting Abraham and Kessler. Even though he initially didn't want the fight against Hopkins, looking at it this way makes sense in order to get Calzaghe in the ring.

If Kelly isn't a throwback fighter than I don't know who is. Like I said earlier, he doesn't choose his opponents, his promoter does and he just trains and fights. Look at De La Hoya, Mayweather, Pacquiao and other boxers of that stature. Those guys have a say in who they fight but Kelly doesn't deal with it that way. He's a fighter and nothing more...

Zertuche, Miranda, Taylor, Taylor, Lockett, Hopkins in two years is not "protected" if you ask me...

SOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo
#

When Calzaghe faces some duff opposition, but also includes the three fighters all his critics wanted him to face he is called a ducker/diver/pussy, yet when Pavlik fights 'whoever
his promoter puts in front of him' he's called a take on anyone anywhere throwback wtf??

You use your ignorance of european fighters to convenientl;y back up your arguments. Lockett is a god awful opponent for a world champion to face, he's lower than the duffs Calzaghe faced (Pudwill, Ashira) the BIG difference is that those guys were late replacements for higher caliber fighters while Lockett was a choice made 2 months prior to the fight, while the other guys on the shortlist were also below top level in Duddy and Rubio.

I have NO problem with Pavlik. He is what he is, an outstanding athlete (+very exciting fighter-good for the sport) who has plenty of time to secure a legacy if he turns out to be good enough. But if you think he's already there with the likes of Calzaghe/Hopkins in terms of legacy then I'd like to know what you're smoking cos it must be good. He's had victories over 1 world class opponent, the same opponent JC was criticised for courting cos he was 'ducking' Kessler. The same opponent who openly refused to fight the 'legend' that is Carl Froch.
you have to prove yourself against all styles to be a true great. He may yet do this.



Mr140: I'm sure you will forget about JC in ten years time, that's what unkowledgable people do, stick their heads between their legs, and lick their own anus until all the bad thoughts that disprove their theories leave their heads.

The difference between Calzaghe and Pavlik's opposition is somewhat debatable. Some say Joe has a better resume and some say Pavlik does. At the end of the day you have to realize that Joe is at the end of his career and his opposition is still being criticized. Pavlik can have his opposition criticized but he's just starting and has a whole career ahead of him.