Calzaghe WILL fight again for £10/$16 million

[JazMerkin]

If i was Joe Calzaghe i would of fought Kelly Pavlik instead of Bernard Hopkins, and Chad Dawson instead of Roy Jones Jr.

Kelly Pavlik is one dimensional and would of probably, been outboxed clearly over 12 rounds.

And Chad Dawson wouldn't have been ready for someone like Joe Calzaghe, he takes too many rounds off and he still hasn't got the experience. To deal with Joe Calzaghe's workrate.

I agree with all that.

Finishing off with a really old Hopkins and a way past it Jones Jr just left me feeling that Joe was cashing out too easily. I would really have liked a final fight against someone young just to hammer home a point about how good he was. Nobody was impressed when the Jones fight was signed really.

Hopkins schooled Pavlik to pieces though remember. JC for me deserves top credit for beatin Hopkins. Hopkins is still an elite fighter no doubt. I think he would have hammered Dawson too, just like he beat Lacy.....

The problem is almost all people I know who're not big Calzaghe fans feel he lost that fight, and despite him being one of my favourites I felt he did too. All that fight did was convince people that if an old Hopkins could do that, imagine what Hopkins from about 2001-2004 could have done. Joe would of schooled Pavlik like he did Lacy though, but no way does he beat Dawson like Lacy. Lacy's weaknesses were apparent to everyone not desperate for some kind of Tyson reincarnation, the best he'd beaten was Robin Reid. Whereas Dawson has beaten Adamek & Glen Johnson at the point that fight could have been made. Whilst I think Joe would have beaten him, no way is it like Lacy.

[Fenster]

I agree with all that.

Finishing off with a really old Hopkins and a way past it Jones Jr just left me feeling that Joe was cashing out too easily. I would really have liked a final fight against someone young just to hammer home a point about how good he was. Nobody was impressed when the Jones fight was signed really.

Hopkins schooled Pavlik to pieces though remember. JC for me deserves top credit for beatin Hopkins. Hopkins is still an elite fighter no doubt. I think he would have hammered Dawson too, just like he beat Lacy.....

The problem is almost all people I know who're not big Calzaghe fans feel he lost that fight, and despite him being one of my favourites I felt he did too All that fight did was convince people that if an old Hopkins could do that, imagine what Hopkins from about 2001-2004 could have done. Joe would of schooled Pavlik like he did Lacy though, but no way does he beat Dawson like Lacy. Lacy's weaknesses were apparent to everyone not desperate for some kind of Tyson reincarnation, the best he'd beaten was Robin Reid. Whereas Dawson has beaten Adamek & Glen Johnson at the point that fight could have been made. Whilst I think Joe would have beaten him, no way is it like Lacy.

How many people are you talking about? I think only a minority think Hopkins won that fight. Polls on here and many other sites all strongly favoured Calzaghe.. ESPECIALLY at the time of the fight.

[JazMerkin]

Hopkins schooled Pavlik to pieces though remember. JC for me deserves top credit for beatin Hopkins. Hopkins is still an elite fighter no doubt. I think he would have hammered Dawson too, just like he beat Lacy.....

The problem is almost all people I know who're not big Calzaghe fans feel he lost that fight, and despite him being one of my favourites I felt he did too All that fight did was convince people that if an old Hopkins could do that, imagine what Hopkins from about 2001-2004 could have done. Joe would of schooled Pavlik like he did Lacy though, but no way does he beat Dawson like Lacy. Lacy's weaknesses were apparent to everyone not desperate for some kind of Tyson reincarnation, the best he'd beaten was Robin Reid. Whereas Dawson has beaten Adamek & Glen Johnson at the point that fight could have been made. Whilst I think Joe would have beaten him, no way is it like Lacy.

How many people are you talking about? I think only a minority think Hopkins won that fight. Polls on here and many other sites all strongly favoured Calzaghe.. ESPECIALLY at the time of the fight.

Everyone at my gym, and tbh most of the posters that I have seen comment on it on here. I wasn't around at the time of the fight, but those I've seen mention it have generally said they feel Calzaghe lost, or they display they are big Joe fans by going on about 'Hopkins cheating, being boring etc etc', which for me is immaterial for how I score a fight

[Mar]

16 mill. Ha ha yea right joe. Get the fuck outta here.

[Fenster]

The problem is almost all people I know who're not big Calzaghe fans feel he lost that fight, and despite him being one of my favourites I felt he did too All that fight did was convince people that if an old Hopkins could do that, imagine what Hopkins from about 2001-2004 could have done. Joe would of schooled Pavlik like he did Lacy though, but no way does he beat Dawson like Lacy. Lacy's weaknesses were apparent to everyone not desperate for some kind of Tyson reincarnation, the best he'd beaten was Robin Reid. Whereas Dawson has beaten Adamek & Glen Johnson at the point that fight could have been made. Whilst I think Joe would have beaten him, no way is it like Lacy.

How many people are you talking about? I think only a minority think Hopkins won that fight. Polls on here and many other sites all strongly favoured Calzaghe.. ESPECIALLY at the time of the fight.

Everyone at my gym, and tbh most of the posters that I have seen comment on it on here. I wasn't around at the time of the fight, but those I've seen mention it have generally said they feel Calzaghe lost, or they display they are big Joe fans by going on about 'Hopkins cheating, being boring etc etc', which for me is immaterial for how I score a fight

Nah.. there's no way MOST on here think Calzaghe lost. The Calzaghe haters turn up in any thread about him, so that's probably what makes it look like what it's not.

There's a poll on here, if i can find it

[Fenster]

There's a bigger poll than this somewhere but still ...

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...won-fight.html

[littlebif]

There's a bigger poll than this somewhere but still ...

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...won-fight.html

must of missed that poll,Calzaghe edged it by 2 rounds for me.

[Fenster]

There's a bigger poll than this somewhere but still ...

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...won-fight.html

must of missed that poll,Calzaghe edged it by 2 rounds for me.

There's a bigger poll with different names where Calzaghe is winning by a landslide (can't find it).

Just about every major boxing site had Calzaghe winning by a huge margin.

[BoomBoom]

Calzaghes record is deceiving in my opinion. Great record, defences, etc. Very good career, not as great though as many think. I cant see him coming back now. I do think he wasted some years, but his career still ran its course. Is he a fighter that should et paid 16 mil for a fight? Absolutely not. Hes not a legend, and most logical people that know what a truly great fighter is are not in not awe of him when he fights. Hes a very good fighter, but probably not even a top 100 atg imo.

[Mr140]

Question bit of topic boom but Ricardo Lopez what would you rate him because in my eyes Joe Calzaghe record is on par with him. I think people bit harsh i am not saying he is a top20 but i think he could make it in top 100 pretty easy boom no way in hell you could name 100 above him i am sure. Wins over Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins are good enough i mean if not for Tito and Oscar Bhops record at middle weight is kinda crap as well all i am saying is top100 i am sure he could make.

[BoomBoom]

Fair enough point, but I do rate Ricardo Lopez higher. The reason is because his record, although undefeated, does him no justice. But in an opposite way. Whats on paper is only a part of it for me. Watching his fights you get the feeling you are watching a spectacular fighter. Its also in how he won. He usually dominated his opposition flawlessly. So truthfully, his opposition wasnt HOFers, but he destroyed worthy opponents. Calzaghe was a very good fighter, also undefeated, but struggled a lot against B level fighters. On paper, I guess you could argue they were to par with one another, but in the ring they werent imo. Being undefeated is an afterthought to me. Its all opinion I guess, its hard to rate a fighter based on anything other than that.

[Mr140]

Fair enough i can understand that i just thought that top 100 was bit harsh reason i even brought it up have some rep dude good post.

[BoomBoom]

100 may be too harsh now that Im really thinking about it but there are a lot of fighters and I doubt I can even count to 100 without losing track lol. He may very well be in the 80-100 group.

[Mr140]

Well the whole point of this thread is to say your opinion then take other peoples thoughts then come up with a answer then your good. Reason i like this forum because there are alot of people all with very different opinions and i think it is great thing.

[NUCLEAR BULL]

i'm glad he's retired, he was in all honesty retired from 1999-2005 with the guys he fought, at one point he didnt even have a station that wanted to show his fights.........all he ever cared about was his unbeaten record, so much so it made hi take fights vs no hopers, he so many times turned down decent fights saying the other guy wasnt in his league and theres no interest in the bout....instead he'd fight some unknown guy with 7 losses on his record ( because yeah!!!! we wanted to watch that instead ) i could go out and build an unbeaten record fighting tomatoo cans or maybe fight my old trainer who's 66 and say i'm unbeaten, i went to a legends turf and beat him as well

stay retired joe, its whats best for you, coming back would only lower your already low cred......even after hatton lost to pac-man people kept saying atleast hatton took on top guys in there prime unlike joe