Best Super Middleweight of all time to date?

[LondonBB]

Someone on these boards once argued that there was difference between being the best and being the greatest. Following that I'd say Roy Jones was the best Super Middleweight of all time - no one who has ever fought at 168 would have beaten a prime RJJ at the weight - while Calzaghe is the greatest (due to a better resume at the weight).

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

[eagle]

Someone on these boards once argued that there was difference between being the best and being the greatest. Following that I'd say Roy Jones was the best Super Middleweight of all time - no one who has ever fought at 168 would have beaten a prime RJJ at the weight - while Calzaghe is the greatest (due to a better resume at the weight).

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

You are truly stupid. The RJJ that beat Toney was levels above Joe Calzaghe. Toney was ranked 2 P4P and Jones completely anihilated him. Yea Jones fough bums at 168 but he only lost 2 rounds in he 7 fights at that weight and knocked 5 guys out.

Jones is the greatest ever fighter the 168 division has ever seen, but Calzaghe accomplished more there cos he stayed at 168 longer. I have no doubt if Jones had stayed at 168 for as long as Joe.
Proof of that is he went up a division, fought bigger better fighters at 175 and owned that division for years.

Joe is a great fighter, but to say he'd beat a mid 90's Jones is laughable.

[amat]

Someone on these boards once argued that there was difference between being the best and being the greatest. Following that I'd say Roy Jones was the best Super Middleweight of all time - no one who has ever fought at 168 would have beaten a prime RJJ at the weight - while Calzaghe is the greatest (due to a better resume at the weight).

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

You have to be kidding me here, you are absolutely ridiculous. Read the words of my post. ON PAPER, the GREATEST Super Middleweight ever by what he accomplished ON PAPER, is Joe Calzaghe. The BEST I believe is Roy Jones Jr. That's NOT because of what he did ON PAPER. It's because of how supremely talented he was AT 168 then anybody else has ever been, imo. So when you bring up him getting knocked out after he was already up to light heavyweight, skipped cruiser went up to heavyweight and then came down again to light heavyweight, that doesn't matter. Because I'm talking about when he was at 168. It doesn't matter who he beat, it's how he did it. JONES JR UD TONEY 12 doesn't mean anything it's how he looked doing it and that Roy Jones is the best ever I believe.

The other shit, I don't know what you're on man but you lost me.

[CutMeMick]

Who was the better of the two RJJ or Joe @ SMW?
I'd have to side with RJJ.

How do I rank them, well being that I personally rank RJJ as a LHW. I would rank Joe as #1.

[BIG H]

Who was the better of the two RJJ or Joe @ SMW?
I'd have to side with RJJ.

How do I rank them, well being that I personally rank RJJ as a LHW. I would rank Joe as #1.

Yeh totally agree. Had they fought Prime for Prime I would strongly favour RJJ to win, BUT if you are ranking them at SMW, You'd have to put JC ahead on achievment, longjevity etc.

[WelshDevilRob]

Nigel Benn vs Gerald McClellan is possibly the Greatest Super Middleweight fight of all-time. Brutal War.

[Tysonbruno]

Nigel Benn vs Gerald McClellan is possibly the Greatest Super Middleweight fight of all-time. Brutal War.

Good fight that shame what happened but good fight.

[ICB]

Someone on these boards once argued that there was difference between being the best and being the greatest. Following that I'd say Roy Jones was the best Super Middleweight of all time - no one who has ever fought at 168 would have beaten a prime RJJ at the weight - while Calzaghe is the greatest (due to a better resume at the weight).

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

[Majesty]

That was probably me, I agree.

The most accomplished super middleweight ever was Calzaghe without any real question imo. The best was Roy Jones Jr., match any super middleweight with a prime RJ then RJ wins no matter who the other guy beat.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?

[LondonBB]

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

For someone to simply say 'a prime roy jones could beat anyone' is ridiculous.

Jones had 7 fights at supermiddleweight and this makes him the best ever? He didnt unify belts and isnt unbeaten...yet hes 'the best ever' for beating only one worthy challenger at that weight category and a load of bums...people need to start looking at the facts rather than bullsh1t.

Calzaghe beats 5 worthy chllengers at that weight (kessler, lacy, reid, eubank and mitchell)...as well as about 5 x the amount of bums that roy jones fought at super middle and p1ssed all over them...yet he 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a prime roy jones'.

Truly laughable.

Jones was in his prime against the tricky southpaw fighter tarver...LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!

So is it inconcievable to think that an even trickier, faster and more skilled southpaw fighter couldve beaten him?

Ah...i forgot, hes roy jones, his unbelievable incredible record of beating toney, trinidad, hopkins and ruiz, makes him automatically the 'greatest ever'.

The fact he lost to tarver and johnson is meaningless right?

What makes me laugh so much on this forum is that people judge boxers on just 1 or 2 performances, TO JUDGE A BOXER AND EVALUATE HOW GOOD THEY ARE YOU MUST LOOK AT THEIR WHOLE CAREER IN BOXING.

Not 1 or 2 performances.

Calzaghe is far from his peak now, he was at his peak 3 years ago when he totally bashed lacy sh1tless...yet people think its totally inconcievable for the guy who completely schooled lacy (better than anyone jones fought at super middle except for toney) that calzaghe 'wouldnt even stand a chance against a peak roy jones'.

Boxers peak for a fight and then decline, but the greatest boxer is the one with the greatest career.

Is a prime buster douglas the greatest heavyweight of all time? NO HES NOT EVEN AN ATG! FAR FROM IT...but he beat a prime tyson...so according to these rules that people have, A PRIME TYSON IS NOT AS GOOD AS A PRIME BUSTER DOUGLAS!

How does that make sense?

Truly pathetic.

One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?

Ok fella...what does it take to beat calzaghe?

What does it take to beat mayweather?

YOU DONT KNOW, NO ONE DOES!

Because they have never been beaten yet, have they?

All of this 'prime roy jones wouldve smashed calzaghe' is a load of sh1t, because NO ONE KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT CALZAGHE as it hasnt been done before.

It might well be true that if they had fought then roy jones wouldve beaten joe calzaghe, but they didnt fight back then...they are fighting now.

So what are you gonna say if calzaghe wins?

Are you going to congratulate calzaghe or are you going to simply say 'but a prime roy jones wouldve beat him easy'...when you still have no idea what it would take to beat joe calzaghe as it hasnt been done before.

We know what it takes to beat roy jones, tarver did it twice and so did johnson...tarver is a tricky southpaw fighter, calzaghe is a tricky southpaw fighter...yet the laughable thing is that it is totally 'inconcievable' that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime roy jones...where as if you look at jones' fights against tarver he was not at ease at all in them.

Does this not suggest that there is a possibility that he mightve been ill at ease whilst fighting an even trickier southpaw fighter in joe calzaghe?

'OOOOOOOOOOH shock horror...the 'totally inconcievable' thought that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime jones'

I dont care for the talk of 'in their prime'...the facts are the facts...the funny thing is that if jones wins this then everyone will scream 'hes miles better than calzaghe' yet if calzaghe wins this theyll scream 'a prime jones is miles better than calzaghe'...when really THEY DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE:

a. Calzaghe will have just beaten jones
b. how the hell can they predict something that never happened?
c. how do they know what could beat calzaghe or what couldnt seeing as hes never been beaten before?

Sometimes i hope jones wins, because then at least i can say 'jones is definately better than calzaghe...end of'...AND IF JONES DOES WIN THEN I WILL SAY THAT JONES IS DEFINATELY BETTER THAN CALZAGHE, END OF STORY.

But if calzaghe wins (and depending how), then i will say that calzaghe is 'greater' than jones with regards to achievements and records. But im still open to saying that if they fought in their primes then it couldve gone either way.

You see, this is the difference between someone who analyses fights and has an OPEN MIND and someone who has a closed mind or is a hater.

With an open mind, if calzaghe wins comfortably i will say that jones may still have beaten calzaghe if they were prime vs prime...yet a hater will automatically say (regardless of how joe batters the sh1t out of roy, if he does) 'jones wouldve smashed calzaghe in his prime' when they simply dont have a clue.

I know what will happen after this fight if calzaghe wins a great victory.

1. calzaghe beats lacy, (haters thought hed lose) lacy is overhyped
2. calzaghe beats kessler, (haters thought hed lose) kessler is overhyped
3. calzaghe beats hopkins, (haters thought hed lose) hopkins is past it (yet then hopkins goes on to school pavlik, and previously school tarver and comfortably beat wright)
4. calzaghe beats jones, (haters thought hed lose) jones is past it and a prime jones wouldve 'easily bashed' a prime calzaghe.

Cant you see the pattern emmerging here?

Like i wrote, if jones wins i will rate him higher than calzaghe (infact at the moment i do rate jones higher than calzaghe at this point in time, but it would change if calzaghe wins), but if jones beats calzaghe then i will straight away say that jones is best supermiddleweight ever without a doubt.

But if calzaghe emphatically beats jones, would you not even consider the thought that he may have made it a close fight when jones was in his prime?

Or would you instantly say (regardless of how the fight goes) that a prime jones wouldve beaten calzaghe.

So youre saying that nothing calzaghe could do...even if he fought bhop again and beat him more comfortably than last time, if he fought dawson and beat him and if he demolishes jones then it still doesnt matter...because 'a prime roy jones wouldve kicked his ass'...

That does not sound like the opinion of an open minded fan of the sport of boxing...it sounds pure and simple like a hater!

[kingfrnk]

One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?

Ok fella...what does it take to beat calzaghe?

What does it take to beat mayweather?

YOU DONT KNOW, NO ONE DOES!

Because they have never been beaten yet, have they?

All of this 'prime roy jones wouldve smashed calzaghe' is a load of sh1t, because NO ONE KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT CALZAGHE as it hasnt been done before.

It might well be true that if they had fought then roy jones wouldve beaten joe calzaghe, but they didnt fight back then...they are fighting now.

So what are you gonna say if calzaghe wins?

Are you going to congratulate calzaghe or are you going to simply say 'but a prime roy jones wouldve beat him easy'...when you still have no idea what it would take to beat joe calzaghe as it hasnt been done before.

We know what it takes to beat roy jones, tarver did it twice and so did johnson...tarver is a tricky southpaw fighter, calzaghe is a tricky southpaw fighter...yet the laughable thing is that it is totally 'inconcievable' that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime roy jones...where as if you look at jones' fights against tarver he was not at ease at all in them.

Does this not suggest that there is a possibility that he mightve been ill at ease whilst fighting an even trickier southpaw fighter in joe calzaghe?

'OOOOOOOOOOH shock horror...the 'totally inconcievable' thought that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime jones'

I dont care for the talk of 'in their prime'...the facts are the facts...the funny thing is that if jones wins this then everyone will scream 'hes miles better than calzaghe' yet if calzaghe wins this theyll scream 'a prime jones is miles better than calzaghe'...when really THEY DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE:

a. Calzaghe will have just beaten jones
b. how the hell can they predict something that never happened?
c. how do they know what could beat calzaghe or what couldnt seeing as hes never been beaten before?

Sometimes i hope jones wins, because then at least i can say 'jones is definately better than calzaghe...end of'...AND IF JONES DOES WIN THEN I WILL SAY THAT JONES IS DEFINATELY BETTER THAN CALZAGHE, END OF STORY.

But if calzaghe wins (and depending how), then i will say that calzaghe is 'greater' than jones with regards to achievements and records. But im still open to saying that if they fought in their primes then it couldve gone either way.

You see, this is the difference between someone who analyses fights and has an OPEN MIND and someone who has a closed mind or is a hater.

With an open mind, if calzaghe wins comfortably i will say that jones may still have beaten calzaghe if they were prime vs prime...yet a hater will automatically say (regardless of how joe batters the sh1t out of roy, if he does) 'jones wouldve smashed calzaghe in his prime' when they simply dont have a clue.

I know what will happen after this fight if calzaghe wins a great victory.

1. calzaghe beats lacy, (haters thought hed lose) lacy is overhyped
2. calzaghe beats kessler, (haters thought hed lose) kessler is overhyped
3. calzaghe beats hopkins, (haters thought hed lose) hopkins is past it (yet then hopkins goes on to school pavlik, and previously school tarver and comfortably beat wright)
4. calzaghe beats jones, (haters thought hed lose) jones is past it and a prime jones wouldve 'easily bashed' a prime calzaghe.

Cant you see the pattern emmerging here?

Like i wrote, if jones wins i will rate him higher than calzaghe (infact at the moment i do rate jones higher than calzaghe at this point in time, but it would change if calzaghe wins), but if jones beats calzaghe then i will straight away say that jones is best supermiddleweight ever without a doubt.

But if calzaghe emphatically beats jones, would you not even consider the thought that he may have made it a close fight when jones was in his prime?

Or would you instantly say (regardless of how the fight goes) that a prime jones wouldve beaten calzaghe.

So youre saying that nothing calzaghe could do...even if he fought bhop again and beat him more comfortably than last time, if he fought dawson and beat him and if he demolishes jones then it still doesnt matter...because 'a prime roy jones wouldve kicked his ass'...

That does not sound like the opinion of an open minded fan of the sport of boxing...it sounds pure and simple like a hater!

your post just repeats the same shit over and over. and thats kinda stupid to say no one knows wat it takes to beat calzaghe when a 43 yr old bhop gave joe the hardest fight he ever fought and in my eyes joe didnt even win. and to say a PRIME ROY JONES at 168 doesnt beat calzage is just the dumbest shit i ever heard. roy was unbelievable at that weight and if joe was so great then he would have got more attention than roy did right?

[LondonBB]

[quote=kingfrnk;625644]

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?

Ok fella...what does it take to beat calzaghe?

What does it take to beat mayweather?

YOU DONT KNOW, NO ONE DOES!

Because they have never been beaten yet, have they?

All of this 'prime roy jones wouldve smashed calzaghe' is a load of sh1t, because NO ONE KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT CALZAGHE as it hasnt been done before.

It might well be true that if they had fought then roy jones wouldve beaten joe calzaghe, but they didnt fight back then...they are fighting now.

So what are you gonna say if calzaghe wins?

Are you going to congratulate calzaghe or are you going to simply say 'but a prime roy jones wouldve beat him easy'...when you still have no idea what it would take to beat joe calzaghe as it hasnt been done before.

We know what it takes to beat roy jones, tarver did it twice and so did johnson...tarver is a tricky southpaw fighter, calzaghe is a tricky southpaw fighter...yet the laughable thing is that it is totally 'inconcievable' that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime roy jones...where as if you look at jones' fights against tarver he was not at ease at all in them.

Does this not suggest that there is a possibility that he mightve been ill at ease whilst fighting an even trickier southpaw fighter in joe calzaghe?

'OOOOOOOOOOH shock horror...the 'totally inconcievable' thought that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime jones'

I dont care for the talk of 'in their prime'...the facts are the facts...the funny thing is that if jones wins this then everyone will scream 'hes miles better than calzaghe' yet if calzaghe wins this theyll scream 'a prime jones is miles better than calzaghe'...when really THEY DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE:

a. Calzaghe will have just beaten jones
b. how the hell can they predict something that never happened?
c. how do they know what could beat calzaghe or what couldnt seeing as hes never been beaten before?

Sometimes i hope jones wins, because then at least i can say 'jones is definately better than calzaghe...end of'...AND IF JONES DOES WIN THEN I WILL SAY THAT JONES IS DEFINATELY BETTER THAN CALZAGHE, END OF STORY.

But if calzaghe wins (and depending how), then i will say that calzaghe is 'greater' than jones with regards to achievements and records. But im still open to saying that if they fought in their primes then it couldve gone either way.

You see, this is the difference between someone who analyses fights and has an OPEN MIND and someone who has a closed mind or is a hater.

With an open mind, if calzaghe wins comfortably i will say that jones may still have beaten calzaghe if they were prime vs prime...yet a hater will automatically say (regardless of how joe batters the sh1t out of roy, if he does) 'jones wouldve smashed calzaghe in his prime' when they simply dont have a clue.

I know what will happen after this fight if calzaghe wins a great victory.

1. calzaghe beats lacy, (haters thought hed lose) lacy is overhyped
2. calzaghe beats kessler, (haters thought hed lose) kessler is overhyped
3. calzaghe beats hopkins, (haters thought hed lose) hopkins is past it (yet then hopkins goes on to school pavlik, and previously school tarver and comfortably beat wright)
4. calzaghe beats jones, (haters thought hed lose) jones is past it and a prime jones wouldve 'easily bashed' a prime calzaghe.

Cant you see the pattern emmerging here?

Like i wrote, if jones wins i will rate him higher than calzaghe (infact at the moment i do rate jones higher than calzaghe at this point in time, but it would change if calzaghe wins), but if jones beats calzaghe then i will straight away say that jones is best supermiddleweight ever without a doubt.

But if calzaghe emphatically beats jones, would you not even consider the thought that he may have made it a close fight when jones was in his prime?

Or would you instantly say (regardless of how the fight goes) that a prime jones wouldve beaten calzaghe.

So youre saying that nothing calzaghe could do...even if he fought bhop again and beat him more comfortably than last time, if he fought dawson and beat him and if he demolishes jones then it still doesnt matter...because 'a prime roy jones wouldve kicked his ass'...

That does not sound like the opinion of an open minded fan of the sport of boxing...it sounds pure and simple like a hater!

your post just repeats the same shit over and over. and thats kinda stupid to say no one knows wat it takes to beat calzaghe when a 43 yr old bhop gave joe the hardest fight he ever fought and in my eyes joe didnt even win. and to say a PRIME ROY JONES at 168 doesnt beat calzage is just the dumbest shit i ever heard. roy was unbelievable at that weight and if joe was so great then he would have got more attention than roy did right?[/quote]

He did get more attention than roy, but only in the uk! Because he didnt go over to america to fight, thats his biggest mistake (although its his managers fault, not his).

But that settles it...we know what category you fit into.

Regardless of what calzaghe does, he could never beat a prime roy jones.

If the man walks on water, doesnt matter, he could never beat prime roy jones.

If the man goes upto beat klitscho, doesnt matter.

If he beats dawson, doesnt matter.

If he beats hopkins again but this time very convincingly...doesnt matter.

If calzaghe beats jones on the 8th, then we know which category youll fit into lol, you wont even congratulate the man or say well done to a legend, instead the first words coming outa your mouth will be...'a prime roy jones wouldve easily beaten calzaghe'.

Fortunately boxing writers and critics have an open mind and dont think like you.

[kingfrnk]

[quote=LondonBB;625654]

Ok fella...what does it take to beat calzaghe?

What does it take to beat mayweather?

YOU DONT KNOW, NO ONE DOES!

Because they have never been beaten yet, have they?

All of this 'prime roy jones wouldve smashed calzaghe' is a load of sh1t, because NO ONE KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT CALZAGHE as it hasnt been done before.

It might well be true that if they had fought then roy jones wouldve beaten joe calzaghe, but they didnt fight back then...they are fighting now.

So what are you gonna say if calzaghe wins?

Are you going to congratulate calzaghe or are you going to simply say 'but a prime roy jones wouldve beat him easy'...when you still have no idea what it would take to beat joe calzaghe as it hasnt been done before.

We know what it takes to beat roy jones, tarver did it twice and so did johnson...tarver is a tricky southpaw fighter, calzaghe is a tricky southpaw fighter...yet the laughable thing is that it is totally 'inconcievable' that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime roy jones...where as if you look at jones' fights against tarver he was not at ease at all in them.

Does this not suggest that there is a possibility that he mightve been ill at ease whilst fighting an even trickier southpaw fighter in joe calzaghe?

'OOOOOOOOOOH shock horror...the 'totally inconcievable' thought that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime jones'

I dont care for the talk of 'in their prime'...the facts are the facts...the funny thing is that if jones wins this then everyone will scream 'hes miles better than calzaghe' yet if calzaghe wins this theyll scream 'a prime jones is miles better than calzaghe'...when really THEY DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE:

a. Calzaghe will have just beaten jones
b. how the hell can they predict something that never happened?
c. how do they know what could beat calzaghe or what couldnt seeing as hes never been beaten before?

Sometimes i hope jones wins, because then at least i can say 'jones is definately better than calzaghe...end of'...AND IF JONES DOES WIN THEN I WILL SAY THAT JONES IS DEFINATELY BETTER THAN CALZAGHE, END OF STORY.

But if calzaghe wins (and depending how), then i will say that calzaghe is 'greater' than jones with regards to achievements and records. But im still open to saying that if they fought in their primes then it couldve gone either way.

You see, this is the difference between someone who analyses fights and has an OPEN MIND and someone who has a closed mind or is a hater.

With an open mind, if calzaghe wins comfortably i will say that jones may still have beaten calzaghe if they were prime vs prime...yet a hater will automatically say (regardless of how joe batters the sh1t out of roy, if he does) 'jones wouldve smashed calzaghe in his prime' when they simply dont have a clue.

I know what will happen after this fight if calzaghe wins a great victory.

1. calzaghe beats lacy, (haters thought hed lose) lacy is overhyped
2. calzaghe beats kessler, (haters thought hed lose) kessler is overhyped
3. calzaghe beats hopkins, (haters thought hed lose) hopkins is past it (yet then hopkins goes on to school pavlik, and previously school tarver and comfortably beat wright)
4. calzaghe beats jones, (haters thought hed lose) jones is past it and a prime jones wouldve 'easily bashed' a prime calzaghe.

Cant you see the pattern emmerging here?

Like i wrote, if jones wins i will rate him higher than calzaghe (infact at the moment i do rate jones higher than calzaghe at this point in time, but it would change if calzaghe wins), but if jones beats calzaghe then i will straight away say that jones is best supermiddleweight ever without a doubt.

But if calzaghe emphatically beats jones, would you not even consider the thought that he may have made it a close fight when jones was in his prime?

Or would you instantly say (regardless of how the fight goes) that a prime jones wouldve beaten calzaghe.

So youre saying that nothing calzaghe could do...even if he fought bhop again and beat him more comfortably than last time, if he fought dawson and beat him and if he demolishes jones then it still doesnt matter...because 'a prime roy jones wouldve kicked his ass'...

That does not sound like the opinion of an open minded fan of the sport of boxing...it sounds pure and simple like a hater!

your post just repeats the same shit over and over. and thats kinda stupid to say no one knows wat it takes to beat calzaghe when a 43 yr old bhop gave joe the hardest fight he ever fought and in my eyes joe didnt even win. and to say a PRIME ROY JONES at 168 doesnt beat calzage is just the dumbest shit i ever heard. roy was unbelievable at that weight and if joe was so great then he would have got more attention than roy did right?[/quote]

He did get more attention than roy, but only in the uk! Because he didnt go over to america to fight, thats his biggest mistake (although its his managers fault, not his).

But that settles it...we know what category you fit into.

Regardless of what calzaghe does, he could never beat a prime roy jones.

If the man walks on water, doesnt matter, he could never beat prime roy jones.

If the man goes upto beat klitscho, doesnt matter.

If he beats dawson, doesnt matter.

If he beats hopkins again but this time very convincingly...doesnt matter.

If calzaghe beats jones on the 8th, then we know which category youll fit into lol, you wont even congratulate the man or say well done to a legend, instead the first words coming outa your mouth will be...'a prime roy jones wouldve easily beaten calzaghe'.

Fortunately boxing writers and critics have an open mind and dont think like you.

now WTF does klitscho and dawson have to do with this were talkin about the best SMW of all time didnt u read the fukin thread if u didnt let me post it for u buddy. its called "Best Super Middleweight of all time to date" so klitscho and dawson has nothin to do with this topic at all. and yes if u put a prime roy at 168 and a prime joe at 168 u basiclly have a rape in the ring. did u see wat he did to a PRIME james toney who has great defense and even got knocked down by roy for tryin to imitate him. now picture joe in the ring with him and wat do u see, Il tell u wat u see, u see joe gettin slapped back n forth so bad that roy is gonna have to ask the ref " hey do u want me to continue kickin this mans ass".

[ICB]

One of the dumbest comments i've ever witnessed, your Joe Calzaghe fanboyism is just laughable. Yea the Roy Jones Jr that fought Antonio Tarver was obviously the same Roy Jones who defeated James Toney

And Roy Jones lost to Antonio Tarver because he was a tricky Southpaw ? are you kidding me ? maybe it had something to do with Roy Jones being 35, and dropping tons of weight making him weak which resulted in losing alot of muscle mass. For someone who is supposedly a body builder im suprised you failed to mention this.

Reggie Johnson was a very good tricky Southpaw fighter. Actually he was better than Antonio Tarver, considering when he was at the end of his career. He only just lost a SD to Antonio Tarver, a prime Roy Jones dominated Reggie Johnson. He also beat Eric Harding who was another good Southpaw fighter.

Please actually learn about boxing Roy Jones defeated James Toney, when he was a P4P top 3 fighter in the world. With victories over Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn, Mike McCallum, Merqui Sosa, Iran Barkley, Doug DeWitt, Tim Littles ETC.

Show me any of Joe Calzaghe's opposition who had a record like that ? if anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe would of beaten a prime Roy Jones then you don't know boxing end of. Roy Jones was beating fighters like Thulani Malinga easily, who beat a prime Robin Reid, and should of had 2 wins over Nigel Benn including a win over Chris Eubank.

Roy Jones is x2 a fast as Joe Calzaghe, he hits x2 as hard and he does everything better than Joe Calzaghe. He was a special fighter where as Joe Calzaghe is just a very good fighter IMO.

Good ppints ICB

I did find it sort of funny how he mentioned how he is "amazed" how people judge fighters off of one or two performances

Yet he brings up how Roy lost to Tarver and Johnson and said Roy was in his "prime" doing them and pulls them out as reason Calzaghe would stand a chance. Isn't he sort of contradicting himself?

Ok fella...what does it take to beat calzaghe?

What does it take to beat mayweather?

YOU DONT KNOW, NO ONE DOES!

Because they have never been beaten yet, have they?

All of this 'prime roy jones wouldve smashed calzaghe' is a load of sh1t, because NO ONE KNOWS WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT CALZAGHE as it hasnt been done before.

It might well be true that if they had fought then roy jones wouldve beaten joe calzaghe, but they didnt fight back then...they are fighting now.

So what are you gonna say if calzaghe wins?

Are you going to congratulate calzaghe or are you going to simply say 'but a prime roy jones wouldve beat him easy'...when you still have no idea what it would take to beat joe calzaghe as it hasnt been done before.

We know what it takes to beat roy jones, tarver did it twice and so did johnson...tarver is a tricky southpaw fighter, calzaghe is a tricky southpaw fighter...yet the laughable thing is that it is totally 'inconcievable' that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime roy jones...where as if you look at jones' fights against tarver he was not at ease at all in them.

Does this not suggest that there is a possibility that he mightve been ill at ease whilst fighting an even trickier southpaw fighter in joe calzaghe?

'OOOOOOOOOOH shock horror...the 'totally inconcievable' thought that a prime calzaghe couldve beaten a prime jones'

I dont care for the talk of 'in their prime'...the facts are the facts...the funny thing is that if jones wins this then everyone will scream 'hes miles better than calzaghe' yet if calzaghe wins this theyll scream 'a prime jones is miles better than calzaghe'...when really THEY DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE:

a. Calzaghe will have just beaten jones
b. how the hell can they predict something that never happened?
c. how do they know what could beat calzaghe or what couldnt seeing as hes never been beaten before?

Sometimes i hope jones wins, because then at least i can say 'jones is definately better than calzaghe...end of'...AND IF JONES DOES WIN THEN I WILL SAY THAT JONES IS DEFINATELY BETTER THAN CALZAGHE, END OF STORY.

But if calzaghe wins (and depending how), then i will say that calzaghe is 'greater' than jones with regards to achievements and records. But im still open to saying that if they fought in their primes then it couldve gone either way.

You see, this is the difference between someone who analyses fights and has an OPEN MIND and someone who has a closed mind or is a hater.

With an open mind, if calzaghe wins comfortably i will say that jones may still have beaten calzaghe if they were prime vs prime...yet a hater will automatically say (regardless of how joe batters the sh1t out of roy, if he does) 'jones wouldve smashed calzaghe in his prime' when they simply dont have a clue.

I know what will happen after this fight if calzaghe wins a great victory.

1. calzaghe beats lacy, (haters thought hed lose) lacy is overhyped
2. calzaghe beats kessler, (haters thought hed lose) kessler is overhyped
3. calzaghe beats hopkins, (haters thought hed lose) hopkins is past it (yet then hopkins goes on to school pavlik, and previously school tarver and comfortably beat wright)
4. calzaghe beats jones, (haters thought hed lose) jones is past it and a prime jones wouldve 'easily bashed' a prime calzaghe.

Cant you see the pattern emmerging here?

Like i wrote, if jones wins i will rate him higher than calzaghe (infact at the moment i do rate jones higher than calzaghe at this point in time, but it would change if calzaghe wins), but if jones beats calzaghe then i will straight away say that jones is best supermiddleweight ever without a doubt.

But if calzaghe emphatically beats jones, would you not even consider the thought that he may have made it a close fight when jones was in his prime?

Or would you instantly say (regardless of how the fight goes) that a prime jones wouldve beaten calzaghe.

So youre saying that nothing calzaghe could do...even if he fought bhop again and beat him more comfortably than last time, if he fought dawson and beat him and if he demolishes jones then it still doesnt matter...because 'a prime roy jones wouldve kicked his ass'...

That does not sound like the opinion of an open minded fan of the sport of boxing...it sounds pure and simple like a hater!

Joe Calzaghe already did lose he lost to Robin Reid, how many gift decisions or how many hard fights did RJJ have in his prime ? and you didn't reply to any of my counter points all you did is post a long rant.