Joe Calzaghe P4P #1?

**ono** · 11-12-2008 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Majesty

I was reading this and I thought of a point i'd like to ask you what to think.

Is someones p4p status in question if their biggest victories are always in question?

Because the only unmistakable uncriticized performance of Calzaghe was his domination of Kessler.

But there is always a but at the end of his other victories.

Roy Jones - Roy was past his prime and even then had Joe on dream street in the first round

Hopkins - Was a split decision and many felt Hopkins won

Lacy - american hype job that struggled against lesser competition that actually boxed him

Eubank - Eubank was weight drained and/or wasn't mentally the same fighter he was after the Watson fight.

Does it effect Joe's p4p status that most of his biggest wins have some sort of taint on them. Because imo p4p means you dominate everyone in their prime whether or not they are the hugest name. But that when it came to your biggest wins are against people in their prime. (Ray Leonard beat Hearns in his prime etc, Ali beat Foreman in his prime etc)

Hindsight is 20/20 but the only true credible prime Joe beat was Kessler, and I mean that in terms of no one questions it or criticizes Joe for it. Not like they do Lacy anyway.

If you look at someone like Pacquiao his biggest wins are almost never in question.

or if you look at Mayweather who's only question was against Castillo which he corrected later on.

Does this effect his ranking in p4p?

It's a joke when people take away credit for the victory over Lacy. Calzaghe was on another planet that night. Lacy was over-hyped, but i'd estimate that he was a much better fighter than he showed against Manfredo and Tsypko. The beating he took from Calzaghe was such that i doubt he's ever come close to recovering from it. Like i say, he was over-hyped but people shouldn't strip all the credit away from Joe just because they've decided to put their hindsight hat on. If Lacy had looked that poor in the fights leading up to the fight, why the hell did the vast majority of writers and experts pick him to KO Calzaghe?

And you say that many felt Hopkins won.......i'd imagine that many more thought Calzaghe won. I'd say Marquez's draw with pac was more questionable, as was Mayweather's win over Castillo (1st).

As for the Kessler fight. I actually said before the fight, that i hope to god Calzaghe doesn't do what he did to Lacy because he'd get happyslapped by all the hindsighters on here. Imagine how 'crap' kessler would have been if Joe had have given his very best performance in that fight.

**Mr140** · 11-12-2008 07:48 PM

Like i was saying though and like to hear a answer Ice do you fell that Pernell like Duran could wins titles at MW kinda same thing with Leonard winning the LHW title and Hearns winning CW titles i dont think Prenell could go up that much in weight and win yet again why I would put Duran, Leonard and Hearns above him when it comes to pound for pound.