Do the recent losses of Calzaghe's opponents depreciate JC's legacy?

[Zain786]

Simple really i mean the losses of Kessler, Jones, Lacy take a big hit on JC's career.....

[Grant1]

Jesus Nelly Pledge.

[toffeejack]

Simple really i mean the losses of Kessler, Jones, Lacy take a big hit on JC's career.....

No Calzaghe fan that I know of gave him any real credit for the Jones win so that is irrelevant.

I believe he ruined Lacy that night I don't care what anyone says. Physically and mentally it's near impossible to come back from a beating like that and then he did his shoulder in.

Kessler is the one that could impact on his legacy I'd agree on that one. Will be interesting to see what happens come the Froch fight.

[Evil Rich]

Kessler, definitely, the rest no as Jones was shot already and we all knew that and most of us knew after the JC fight Lacy wasn't very good. Not sure why people are going mental about RJJ now, it's funny watching haters gloat about it...EVERYONE KNEW HE WAS SHOT TO SHIT!

And let's face it, does JC have that greater legacy anyway? I think he is a very, very good fighter but I'll never put him on the level of the top 50 of all time because I don't really know how good he was and I'll never forgive him/Jones Jnr/Hopkins for not fighting him in there primes. Even Jeff would acknowledge it would be a good fight and that all parties together are to blame for them not coming off, not just Joe.

He is a good fighter who could have been great, could not have been too. Will never know and I don't expect people to much change there opinion on that.

[brown bomber]

Not for me because I knew the truth before these outcomes.

[Grant1]

Not for me because I knew the truth before these outcomes.

Serious question pal, not having a dig, I'm interested :good

If you become a successful trainer (i've every confidence you will), will you accept 'fans' judging your fighters by the same standards you judge JC?

[GazOC]

I don't agree with either of the options. No, the losses don't greatly depreciate Calzaghes legacy and No, he's not an ATG in any case.

Although I guess the question has been framed in typical ESB fashion to attempt to troll/ wind up people rather than ask a genuine question.

[draw99]

I say it wont depreciate his legacy, because I dont think he has a great legacy in the first place.

He fought bums most of his career and then two pensioners. Hardly an ATG.

[Bonavena25]

Deleted

[Flea Man]

His legacy wasn't great anyway, but the fact he managed to stifle a clearly still-decent B-Hop means he WAS NOT SHIT.

But nowhere near the likes of Jack Kid Berg, Ted Kid Lewis, I'd rate Benny Lynch over Calzaghe (wins over Kane and Montana surpass anything on Calzaghe's resume) and the likes of Ken Buchanan and Lennox Lewis are way up at the top of the list.

Calzaghe is a top 10 British fighter, not the best, and I don't believe that far from Hatton in terms of quality wins.

However, he showed a decent all-round skillset and ability to adapt which sees him match up well head-to-head. Good enough to be an ATG???

:rofl No chance :deal

[Mazallan]

He will always rate as a top 5 Welsh super middle and little more.

[Bonavena25]

Yes, without a doubt. Can't be denied. However only a relative smidgeon in the overall scheme of things as I still think he beats all the fighters he supposedly avoided in the earlier part of his career apart from Jones in his prime and maybe B-Hop.

It all seems to boild down to indifference in regards to his fighting style. Alot of his fights, defining fights, were quite messy.

[slip&counter]

nope

[brown bomber]

Serious question pal, not having a dig, I'm interested :good

If you become a successful trainer (i've every confidence you will), will you accept 'fans' judging your fighters by the same standards you judge JC? Absolutely, I judge all fighters the same. Someone with a minute amount of talent who achieves a great deal, will make me prouder then someone who has it all on a plate from the start and achieves what amounts to a bit of a con/career.

Not to say that 46-0, numerous titles, blah de blah de blah is not impressive. Its amazing. But the numbers and the titles don't tell the full story.

If I had a lad who won the ABA's fighting dumplings and got to 46-0 with very little hard fights along the way, and every opponent was selected based on their incompatances rather then their skill, until it suddenly became apparent that he had become driftwood in the international boxing mix and fought some so-so opposition-

then I had another boy who got to 46-2 but fought the two best guys out there and lost decisively, but also beat THE top fighter in his STILL COMPETITIVE division- regardless of talent i'm going to be happier with the kid who laid it on the line and tried to be outstanding, instead of just been a nobody- having four moderately challenging fights then retiring calling themselves and all time great in various song and newspapers.

Calzaghe's supposed greatness was merely a coincidental accumulation of wins coupled with a balls out jackpot gamble at the end of his career. And every credit to him because it still took a great deal of hard work. But he's not a true great.

[ero-sennin]

Not for me because I knew the truth before these outcomes.

:deal

That doesn't mean he was a bad fighter but when you say "great" you're talking about guys like Pacquiao and Mayweather the creme de la creme.

In football terms, JC would be a Michael Owen while the word "great" would refer to Maradonna, Ronaldo (Brazillian one) etc.

In cricket terms, JC is a VVS Laxman/Jason Gillespie, not a great like Tendulkar/McGrath.

In Golfing terms, he's a Vijay Singh, not Tiger woods. Pacquiao is a Tiger Woods (not cuz of his private life either), Ali is Tiger Woods.

Obviously this is no bad thing, most would give their right arm to achieve what he has so I don't know why JC fans get so offended and insist he has to be considered an ATG. Great does mean Great, and to achieve greatness, your legacy must match up IMO. It's almost an insult to the true greats for someone who's second best win is Kessler to be put in the same category as them.

[brown bomber]

:deal

That doesn't mean he was a bad fighter but when you say "great" you're talking about guys like Pacquiao and Mayweather.

In football terms, JC would be a Michael Owen while the word "great" would refer to Maradonna, Ronaldo (Brazillian one) etc.

In cricket terms, JC is a VVS Laxman/Jason Gillespie, not a great like Tendulkar/McGrath.

In Golfing terms, he's a VJ Singh, not Tiger woods. Pacquiao is a Tiger Woods (not cuz of his private life either), Ali is Tiger Woods.

Obviously this is no bad thing, most would give their right arm to achieve what he has so I don't know why JC fans get so offended and insist he has to be considered an ATG. Great does mean Great, and to achieve greatness, your legacy must match up IMO.:good

[Flea Man]

Except for the fact Floyd also has a pretty bad resume in terms of opponents.

I don't think he's anywhere near the top 50 put it that way, he has an undefeated record mainly because he cherry picked the weakest champions in every division because 'the WBC is the best belt' (which as the twattish Suliaman has proved isn't always the case)

For me, moreso than ever, nowadays it's not meaningless baubles but level of opposition that defines the fighter.

Champs back in the day HAD to fight the best opposition available.

Floyd has not done this, regardless of his often dazzling skillset, I don't believe he has tested it against an opponent who can REALLY put him to the test.

[brown bomber]

Except for the fact Floyd also has a pretty bad resume in terms of opponents.

I don't think he's anywhere near the top 50 put it that way, he has an undefeated record mainly because he cherry picked the weakest champions in every division because 'the WBC is the best belt' (which as the twattish Suliaman has proved isn't always the case)

For me, moreso than ever, nowadays it's not meaningless baubles but level of opposition that defines the fighter.

Champs back in the day HAD to fight the best opposition available.

Floyd has not done this, regardless of his often dazzling skillset, I don't believe he has tested it against an opponent who can REALLY put him to the test. Manfreddy - the man, Corrales- the man, G Hernandez- the man, De La Hoya- the man, Castillio- The man, Judah- Still Dangerous, Hatton- the man, I could go on.... the guys a legend.

[ero-sennin]

^

Fleaman, that's somewhat true, but I think he still has a resume thats a step or two above JC's and has probably done enough to be considered a great, although it is debatable. If he finishes his career by beating Pac, Mosely and then Williams (which I don't think he will), I'll have no complaints. Obviosly I want Pac to kick his ass though:yep

[Flea Man]

Manfreddy - the man, Corrales- the man, G Hernandez- the man, De La Hoya- the man, Castillio- The man, Judah- Still Dangerous, Hatton- the man, I could go on.... the guys a legend.

No.

Hatton 'the man' at Welter?

gatti 'the man' at 140?

Corrales had already moved up, and was in the middle of a court case. He was clearly not with it. Corrales himself was essentially a flawed banger. Did we know that at the time? No. Did he prove his greatness post-Floyd? No.

Castillo was probably the best at 135lbs, but IMO he gave Floyd a real hard fight in the first match. And Castillo is NOT an ATG.

De La Hoya, yep, good win, but close enough and Oscar was past his best.

A victim of circumstance? Maybe. But an ATG at the highest echelons? No.

Floyd has a chance to prove his skillset against someone who can really give him a go. Shane is still EXTREMELY dangerous (and a far higher calibre of fighter than say, Judah) and Pac is at his peak and P4P no.1 (and I for one would not say 'Manny was too small' if Floyd were to beat him because he clearly isn't too small unlike Marquez)

Only my opinion, I hope my reasoning has shown that I'm not just a 'hater' :good

[Grant1]

Absolutely, I judge all fighters the same.

Manfreddy - the man, Corrales- the man, G Hernandez- the man, De La Hoya- the man, Castillio- The man, Judah- Still Dangerous, Hatton- the man, I could go on.... the guys a legend.

If you did judge all the same you'd have something along these lines -

Manfreddy - Lost 8 times. Crap

C Hernandez - Knocked down, lucky to survive.

DLH - Lost the fight.

Castillo - Lost the first fight.

Judah - Coming off a loss to Baldomir. Worthless.

Hatton - Crap at 147.

[D-MAC]

:deal

That doesn't mean he was a bad fighter but when you say "great" you're talking about guys like Pacquiao and Mayweather the creme de la creme.

In football terms, JC would be a Michael Owen while the word "great" would refer to Maradonna, Ronaldo (Brazillian one) etc.

In cricket terms, JC is a VVS Laxman/Jason Gillespie, not a great like Tendulkar/McGrath.

In Golfing terms, he's a Vijay Singh, not Tiger woods. Pacquiao is a Tiger Woods (not cuz of his private life either), Ali is Tiger Woods.

Obviously this is no bad thing, most would give their right arm to achieve what he has so I don't know why JC fans get so offended and insist he has to be considered an ATG. Great does mean Great, and to achieve greatness, your legacy must match up IMO. It's almost an insult to the true greats for someone who's second best win is Kessler to be put in the same category as them.

I like this explanation; good post.:good

["TKO"]

I don't agree with either of the options. No, the losses don't greatly depreciate Calzaghes legacy and No, he's not an ATG in any case.

Although I guess the question has been framed in typical ESB fashion to attempt to troll/ wind up people rather than ask a genuine question.

This is the correct answer :good

[HONDA2006]

I say it wont depreciate his legacy, because I dont think he has a great legacy in the first place.

He fought bums most of his career and then two pensioners. Hardly an ATG.

:thumbsup

[46and0]

Why do people from the UK use the Americanism of resume?

It's C.V.

[GazOC]

Why do people from the UK use the Americanism of resume?

It's C.V.

When we're taling boxing, its "record"....:deal

;)

[Jaime]

A Lock for top 170.

Sneaks in to top ten British.

[essexboy]

Any logical fans of boxing had questions throughout Calzaghe's career, let alone now its over.

[janitor]

Simple really i mean the losses of Kessler, Jones, Lacy take a big hit on JC's career.....

Only if you ranked him on the assumption that they would go on to great things.

If you are prudent then you ranked him based on what they had done up to that time.

[Top Dog]

If Pacman knocks the fuck out of Gayweather does that suddenly make him shit and everyone he has fought shit? :-(