If Calzaghe's record is so bad, whose is better?

[Rantcatrat]

I noticed a few are saying Pavlik and Cotto etc... have taken risks at a younger age and Calzaghe didn't. Thing is, i don't see why it matters. If you take a risk, you take a risk. At the end of the day Calzaghe wiped the floor with the guys he supposedly took a risk with (well except Hopkins), whereas Pavlik and Cotto didn't.

He's always going to have his haters and i must admit i'm not a big fan, but his record is second to none. Same with Mayweather though. Great record, but folk would rather talk about the guys he didn't face.

It matters and it is relevant because it reflects the quality of their legacy. A fighter's standing in history depends largely on who they beat. Just the fact that people are comparing Calzaghe's record, at age 37, to records of fighters who are 10 years younger should be indicative enough. Cotto has already fought at least 4 accomplished fighters in their prime. Pavlik took a risk fighting Hopkins, and Jermain Taylor for that matter, whereas when Calzaghe was at that age he was content to fight British clubfighters. Whether taking the risk was justified is another story (ask Pavlik or Cotto). Moreover, Calzaghe only "wiped the floor" with one prime accomplished fighter, Kessler. Pavlik and Cotto can already make that claim, at age 26.

And you are dead-on about PBF. Good comparison. PBF was an amazing pound for pound fighter, but when he left the game he had never fought any accomplished prime welterweight. He left the game when Sugar Shane, Miguel Cotto, and Antonio Margarito were all in their primes. It will always be a knock on PBF.

Name them?

Obviously, I was exagerating a bit with the point being that none of his fights between 1997 and 2004 were against prime, accomplished boxers.

Just for you though , per boxrec, after winning the WBO strap from Eubank in 1997, Calzaghe fought: Branco Sobot (finished his career with a 19-11 record and was destroyed by Danilo Haussler of recent dubious fame), David Sarie (didn't fight anyone of note after fighting Calzaghe, rarely left Britain, only twice, and lost to Sven Ottke and Andre Thysse when he did) Richard Woodhall (never left Britain, well once, and was beat by an American club fighter in Baltimore, Maryland, retired after the Calzaghe fight at age 32) Will McIntryre (american club fighter, a bit better then the rest), Charles Brewer (biggest name on this list, finished career at 40-11) Miguel Angel Jiminez (americannever fought anyone of note), Tocker Pudwill (??), Omar Sheika (average fighter, career ended at 27- etc. Best wins during that span were over Mario Veit and Robin Reid.

Edit: this post sounds like I am a Calzaghe hater, but that is far from the truth. He is a special talent. I am just showing the knocks on him from a legacy standpoint.

[Fenster]

It matters and it is relevant because it reflects the quality of their legacy. A fighter's standing in history depends largely on who they beat. Just the fact that people are comparing Calzaghe's record, at age 37, to records of fighters who are 10 years younger should be indicative enough. Cotto has already fought at least 4 accomplished fighters in their prime. Pavlik took a risk fighting Hopkins, and Jermain Taylor for that matter, whereas when Calzaghe was at that age he was content to fight British clubfighters. Whether taking the risk was justified is another story (ask Pavlik or Cotto). Moreover, Calzaghe only "wiped the floor" with one prime accomplished fighter, Kessler. Pavlik and Cotto can already make that claim, at age 26.

And you are dead-on about PBF. Good comparison. PBF was an amazing pound for pound fighter, but when he left the game he had never fought any accomplished prime welterweight. He left the game when Sugar Shane, Miguel Cotto, and Antonio Margarito were all in their primes. It will always be a knock on PBF.

Name them?

Obviously, I was exagerating a bit with the point being that none of his fights between 1997 and 2004 were against prime, accomplished boxers.

Just for you though , per boxrec, after winning the WBO strap from Eubank in 1997, Calzaghe fought: Branco Sobot (finished his career with a 19-11 record and was destroyed by Danilo Haussler of recent dubious fame), David Sarie (didn't fight anyone of note after fighting Calzaghe, rarely left Britain, only twice, and lost to Sven Ottke and Andre Thysse when he did) Richard Woodhall (never left Britain, well once, and was beat by an American club fighter in Baltimore, Maryland, retired after the Calzaghe fight at age 32) Will McIntryre (american club fighter, a bit better then the rest), Charles Brewer (biggest name on this list, finished career at 40-11) Miguel Angel Jiminez (americannever fought anyone of note), Tocker Pudwill (??), Omar Sheika (average fighter, career ended at 27- etc. Best wins during that span were over Mario Veit and Robin Reid.

Blimey! So now you're calling Keith Holmes a "clubfighter?" For what it's worth - he was the WBC champion.

Sven Ottke was "no one of note?"

"Will McIntryre a bit better then the rest?"

No disrepect mate.. but you CLEARLY have NO IDEA about that time period. That was a SHOCKING interpretation of boxrec records.

Shocking.

[Rantcatrat]

Name them?

Obviously, I was exagerating a bit with the point being that none of his fights between 1997 and 2004 were against prime, accomplished boxers.

Just for you though , per boxrec, after winning the WBO strap from Eubank in 1997, Calzaghe fought: Branco Sobot (finished his career with a 19-11 record and was destroyed by Danilo Haussler of recent dubious fame), David Sarie (didn't fight anyone of note after fighting Calzaghe, rarely left Britain, only twice, and lost to Sven Ottke and Andre Thysse when he did) Richard Woodhall (never left Britain, well once, and was beat by an American club fighter in Baltimore, Maryland, retired after the Calzaghe fight at age 32) Will McIntryre (american club fighter, a bit better then the rest), Charles Brewer (biggest name on this list, finished career at 40-11) Miguel Angel Jiminez (americannever fought anyone of note), Tocker Pudwill (??), Omar Sheika (average fighter, career ended at 27- etc. Best wins during that span were over Mario Veit and Robin Reid.

Blimey! So now you're calling Keith Holmes a "clubfighter?" For what it's worth - he was the WBC champion.

Sven Ottke was "no one of note?"

"Will McIntryre a bit better then the rest?"

No disrepect mate.. but you CLEARLY have NO IDEA about that time period. That was a SHOCKING interpretation of boxrec records.

Shocking.

I misspoke on the McIntrye call. I edited that in, in the wrong place, see the Eubank and Reid comment at the bottom of my post.

I didn't mention Keith Holmes.

Sven Ottke, Robin Reid, and Eubank due to merit some praise. But, this is over a 7, repeat 7 year period. It may have been because of the lackluster competition in his division, but I mean come on, does that list impress you?

School me then. Explain to me, in the context of his wins over accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges, why that list merits praise?

[Fenster]

Obviously, I was exagerating a bit with the point being that none of his fights between 1997 and 2004 were against prime, accomplished boxers.

Just for you though , per boxrec, after winning the WBO strap from Eubank in 1997, Calzaghe fought: Branco Sobot (finished his career with a 19-11 record and was destroyed by Danilo Haussler of recent dubious fame), David Sarie (didn't fight anyone of note after fighting Calzaghe, rarely left Britain, only twice, and lost to Sven Ottke and Andre Thysse when he did) Richard Woodhall (never left Britain, well once, and was beat by an American club fighter in Baltimore, Maryland, retired after the Calzaghe fight at age 32) Will McIntryre (american club fighter, a bit better then the rest), Charles Brewer (biggest name on this list, finished career at 40-11) Miguel Angel Jiminez (americannever fought anyone of note), Tocker Pudwill (??), Omar Sheika (average fighter, career ended at 27- etc. Best wins during that span were over Mario Veit and Robin Reid.

Blimey! So now you're calling Keith Holmes a "clubfighter?" For what it's worth - he was the WBC champion.

Sven Ottke was "no one of note?"

"Will McIntryre a bit better then the rest?"

No disrepect mate.. but you CLEARLY have NO IDEA about that time period. That was a SHOCKING interpretation of boxrec records.

Shocking.

I misspoke on the McIntrye call. I edited that in, in the wrong place, see the Eubank and Reid comment at the bottom of my post.

I didn't mention Keith Holmes.

Sven Ottke, Robin Reid, and Eubank due to merit some praise. But, this is over a 7, repeat 7 year period. It may have been because of the lackluster competition in his division, but I mean come on, does that list impress you?

School me then. Explain to me, in the context of his wins over accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges, why that list merits praise?

You said Richie(ard) Woodall lost to a clubfighter. That clubfighter is Keith Holmes.

Calzaghe never fought Sven Ottke.

School you? I've never claimed Calzaghe beat great fighters through that time period.

Look mate, i'm sure you know plenty about boxing, but you don't KNOW this time period. That is CLEAR.

If you had originally said "Calzaghe fought bums" instead of "British bums" i wouldn't have even questioned you. I wanted to know who the "british bums" were.

Calzaghe is clearly NEW to you. So i understand you would think his opposition is below par.

[Rantcatrat]

Blimey! So now you're calling Keith Holmes a "clubfighter?" For what it's worth - he was the WBC champion.

Sven Ottke was "no one of note?"

"Will McIntryre a bit better then the rest?"

No disrepect mate.. but you CLEARLY have NO IDEA about that time period. That was a SHOCKING interpretation of boxrec records.

Shocking.

I misspoke on the McIntrye call. I edited that in, in the wrong place, see the Eubank and Reid comment at the bottom of my post.

I didn't mention Keith Holmes.

Sven Ottke, Robin Reid, and Eubank due to merit some praise. But, this is over a 7, repeat 7 year period. It may have been because of the lackluster competition in his division, but I mean come on, does that list impress you?

School me then. Explain to me, in the context of his wins over accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges, why that list merits praise?

You said Richie(ard) Woodall lost to a clubfighter. That clubfighter is Keith Holmes.

Calzaghe never fought Sven Ottke.

School you? I've never claimed Calzaghe beat great fighters through that time period.

Look mate, i'm sure you know plenty about boxing, but you don't KNOW this time period. That is CLEAR.

If you had originally said "Calzaghe fought bums" instead of "British bums" i wouldn't have even questioned you. I wanted to know who the "british bums" were.

Calzaghe is clearly NEW to you. So i understand you would think his opposition is below par.

I don't have any problem eating my words (a la "british bums"). Burnt pride is not my style. After researching his record, it appeared, Calzaghe fought subpar American and British competition.

Why question me if you agreed with the principle behind what I was putting forth? You agreed in your last post that he didn't fight accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges. Then, who cares if they were British or American? Unless you are a complete dullard, which you may be, could you not see the point in the post?

Your points didn't progress the discussion. I admit I was not a boxing fanatic in the late 90's. And it is very, very unfortunate. Trust me, I regret it completely. Do you feel vindicated now? Hopefully.

[Fenster]

I misspoke on the McIntrye call. I edited that in, in the wrong place, see the Eubank and Reid comment at the bottom of my post.

I didn't mention Keith Holmes.

Sven Ottke, Robin Reid, and Eubank due to merit some praise. But, this is over a 7, repeat 7 year period. It may have been because of the lackluster competition in his division, but I mean come on, does that list impress you?

School me then. Explain to me, in the context of his wins over accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges, why that list merits praise?

You said Richie(ard) Woodall lost to a clubfighter. That clubfighter is Keith Holmes.

Calzaghe never fought Sven Ottke.

School you? I've never claimed Calzaghe beat great fighters through that time period.

Look mate, i'm sure you know plenty about boxing, but you don't KNOW this time period. That is CLEAR.

If you had originally said "Calzaghe fought bums" instead of "British bums" i wouldn't have even questioned you. I wanted to know who the "british bums" were.

Calzaghe is clearly NEW to you. So i understand you would think his opposition is below par.

I don't have any problem eating my words (a la "british bums"). Burnt pride is not my style. After researching his record, it appeared, Calzaghe fought subpar American and British competition.

Why question me if you agreed with the principle behind what I was putting forth? You agreed in your last post that he didn't fight accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges. Then, who cares if they were British or American? Unless you are a complete dullard, which you may be, could you not see the point in the post?

Your points didn't progress the discussion. I admit I was not a boxing fanatic in the late 90's. And it is very, very unfortunate. Trust me, I regret it completely. Do you feel vindicated now? Hopefully.

I'm NOT trying to win anything or embarrass anyone. Sorry if that's how it seems.

YES - i am a dullard. Fact. I've been over this same stupid fucking debate a billion times.

You would have a better understanding of the calibre of fighter Calzaghe faced if you realised the supermiddle divison was very WEAK through that period - hence the lack of star fights.

[Rantcatrat]

You said Richie(ard) Woodall lost to a clubfighter. That clubfighter is Keith Holmes.

Calzaghe never fought Sven Ottke.

School you? I've never claimed Calzaghe beat great fighters through that time period.

Look mate, i'm sure you know plenty about boxing, but you don't KNOW this time period. That is CLEAR.

If you had originally said "Calzaghe fought bums" instead of "British bums" i wouldn't have even questioned you. I wanted to know who the "british bums" were.

Calzaghe is clearly NEW to you. So i understand you would think his opposition is below par.

I don't have any problem eating my words (a la "british bums"). Burnt pride is not my style. After researching his record, it appeared, Calzaghe fought subpar American and British competition.

Why question me if you agreed with the principle behind what I was putting forth? You agreed in your last post that he didn't fight accomplished, prime, legitimate challenges. Then, who cares if they were British or American? Unless you are a complete dullard, which you may be, could you not see the point in the post?

Your points didn't progress the discussion. I admit I was not a boxing fanatic in the late 90's. And it is very, very unfortunate. Trust me, I regret it completely. Do you feel vindicated now? Hopefully.

I'm NOT trying to win anything or embarrass anyone. Sorry if that's how it seems.

YES - i am a dullard. Fact. I've been over this same stupid fucking debate a billion times.

You would have a better understanding of the calibre of fighter Calzaghe faced if you realised the supermiddle divison was very WEAK through that period - hence the lack of star fights.

Fair enough. I have too. Usually, on the other side. . Maybe Calzaghe did fight everyone he could at 168 during that time period.