If Calzaghe DID face the "names" over the last 10 yrs...???

[Taffyy]

Alot of post lately about JC's lack of competition , As a fan I admit it has been frustrating that a potential Great fighter might only be remembered as a good fighter , Without any bullshit replies how would have he faired against the other "greats" over the last 10yrs....????

[kg0208]

Alot of post lately about JC's lack of competition , As a fan I admit it has been frustrating that a potential Great fighter might only be remembered as a good fighter , Without any bullshit replies how would have he faired against the other "greats" over the last 10yrs....????

He would be even money or favored over everyone from 160 to 175 except Jones, possibly Hopkins.

[Taffyy]

At last a sensible fucking post fom the states............I agree..

[digiram]

Not a fan of his, but I'm not gonna deny his greatness. I think he beats everyone from 160-175 except Toney, Jones, Hopkins, and
















































Kessler ;)

[Strike]

I think he would have beaten Hopkins when they were both at their best. Hopkins has been so lazy in so many fights and destroying a blown up welterweight does not persuade me that he could avoid the pressure, speed and reach advantage that Calzaghe has.

RJJ would have wiped the floor with Joe when fighting at their respective bests. Toney would have been a great fight, but I would favour Toney, but it would be close.

[dangerousity]

Toney & RJJ beat him. Id favour him against the rest.

[Amsterdam]

He would be even money or favored over everyone from 160 to 175 except Jones, possibly Hopkins.

Favoured over all except Jones. Hopkins would trouble him stylistically, but he is also not Hopkins' optimum style either with his fantastic in and out movement and since the fight would be at 168, I don't see why people would favour Hopkins when DLH's early movement and quickness had some effect.

Hopkins in a 15 rounder, Calzaghe in a 12 rounder, close but clear in both regards.

Now in terms of who would beat him historically in the 160-175 weight range, I have that down -

Roy
Moorer
Bob Foster
Michael Spinks

Roy wins clear, Moorer KO's him, Spinks wins a clear decision and Foster blows him out early.

[Amsterdam]

Toney & RJJ beat him. Id favour him against the rest.

Calzaghe has as bad a style for James Toney as Jones did, if it not worse. The way Toney is stationary and shells up in that Philly defence, he's especialy open to the workrate and awkward shots in the shoulder roll. Then Calzaghe will pop in and out and also do pretty decent off the jab, which Toney is particularly open to.

Calzaghe 116-112 James Toney.

[kg0208]

Favoured over all except Jones. Hopkins would trouble him stylistically, but he is also not Hopkins' optimum style either with his fantastic in and out movement and since the fight would be at 168, I don't see why people would favour Hopkins when DLH's early movement and quickness had some effect.

Hopkins in a 15 rounder, Calzaghe in a 12 rounder, close but clear in both regards.

Now in terms of who would beat him historically in the 160-175 weight range, I have that down -

Roy
Moorer
Bob Foster
Michael Spinks

Roy wins clear, Moorer KO's him, Spinks wins a clear decision and Foster blows him out early.

I am unsure of Calzaghe vs 1997-2000 Hopkins (the one who beat Trinidad loses to Calzaghe 8-4 IMO).

I was only saying Hopkins may have been favored over Calzaghe.

I know you don't put much stock in the old time fighters, but there are some 175lb fighters I could see beating both Calzaghe and Jones at that weight.

[Amsterdam]

I believe he beats Toney, but loses to Jones. A prime Hopkins beats him as well.

Hopkins still doesn't like speed and movement and Calzaghe's awkwardness makes that even worse, not saying it wouldn't be a highly competitive fight, but you'd have to edge Calzaghe for size and styles here.

He's a bigger man with great speed and more awkward than Roy, not as good as Roy, but presses the fight more also and has the chin to withstand anything from Hopkins.

[Amsterdam]

I am unsure of Calzaghe vs 1997-2000 Hopkins (the one who beat Trinidad loses to Calzaghe 8-4 IMO).

I was only saying Hopkins may have been favored over Calzaghe.

I know you don't put much stock in the old time fighters, but there are some 175lb fighters I could see beating both Calzaghe and Jones at that weight.

Who did you have in mind?

I pick Foster over Jones, Moorer, DM, Spinks have an outside chance but I favour Jones. Moore and below just do not have the ability or skill to pull it off, they'd get wiped out IMO, I can even give you a video analysis by PM sometime if you'd like explaining why some of the older ATG's just wouldn't cut it against Jones and then you can at least have a new point of view to look at with your own analysis on these issue's.

Everyone has to remember that Jones' timing and speed is the best ever, nobody had that timing and speed combination in the history of the sport, truly amazing.

But Bob Foster times him coming in and his power was just unreal at LHW, Jones would get KOed at some point even if he's ahead on the cards. I'd take Foster in 5. Foster has the skill and reach that evens this out.

[kg0208]

Who did you have in mind?

I pick Foster over Jones, Moorer, DM, Spinks have an outside chance but I favour Jones. Moore and below just do not have the ability or skill to pull it off, they'd get wiped out IMO, I can even give you a video analysis by PM sometime if you'd like explaining why some of the older ATG's just wouldn't cut it against Jones and then you can at least have a new point of view to look at with your own analysis on these issue's.

Everyone has to remember that Jones' timing and speed is the best ever, nobody had that timing and speed combination in the history of the sport, truly amazing.

But Bob Foster times him coming in and his power was just unreal at LHW, Jones would get KOed at some point even if he's ahead on the cards. I'd take Foster in 5. Foster has the skill and reach that evens this out.
Moore and Charles are the ones that come to mind immediately. Charles especially. He was great at adapting to styles, and he was a bit larger than Jones and Calzaghe. The footage I have seen showed he had good timing, good power, great skill. He also didn't throw as many wide looping punches as Moore.

Also, Billy Conn would be a live underdog.

[Amsterdam]

More awkward than Roy you say? Roy's overall movement was smoother and even his stance and style at times was enough to befuddle opponents. His stance would literally make it hard for an opponent to throw a good punch because it was so awkward. Calzaghe is very fast, but has no advantages like Roy does, especially the defensive reflexes I don't think, and while I think he beats the more stationary Toney, I think the more mobile prime B-Hop with the better jab would have a lot more success. Very close fight, but I think Hopkins is just a little more solid, then again, that's not what it's all about, but I'll stick with Hop.

He's more awkward because he comes in from crazy angles and throws a lot more punches. Roy would run and explode, Calzaghe will box a little and then commense with an all out assault, Hopkins' right hand is not going to KO Calzaghe at 168 and Calzaghe will drive him back at times and throw a heavy workrate on the ropes. Plus, Calzaghe can actually be rougher inside the clinch than Hopkins and the handspeed difference is absurd.

Am I off base or missing anything here? I'm open to anyone's views on Hopkins/Calzaghe.

[Amsterdam]

I'd pick Ezzard Charles over any LHW of all time. You make your case all you want for the guys of the 20's, 30's, and below being primitive, but I honestly don't see it at all for someone like Charles, or Robinson.

You don't see it for Charles or Robinson because these guys were some of the first of the truly modern styles, Robinson especially, it looks good on film from a singular view, however, we also have their opponents to look at.

Take Maxim or La Motta, these guys are very primitive and La Motta beat and troubled him always and even exposed Robinson's defensive flaws with a totally, almost jokefully looking style and skill level, if that makes sense.

Charles has some examples also, these guys had the 'fundamentals' down, but they did not have anywhere the natural timing, speed and other factors of a modern speedster like Jones or Calzaghe and that's why they wouldn't win.

I have great boxing fundamentals, combinations, etc., but my physical ability is 20x lower than that of these guys, as are all of us, but I study boxing in great amounts. This is a good example. Take Baldomir-Mayweather also, Baldomir really has great fundamentals, just lacks the timing and other abilities to do anything, same goes for Charles and Moore.

[Marnoff]

He's more awkward because he comes in from crazy angles and throws a lot more punches. Roy would run and explode, Calzaghe will box a little and then commense with an all out assault, Hopkins' right hand is not going to KO Calzaghe at 168 and Calzaghe will drive him back at times and throw a heavy workrate on the ropes. Plus, Calzaghe can actually be rougher inside the clinch than Hopkins and the handspeed difference is absurd.

Am I off base or missing anything here? I'm open to anyone's views on Hopkins/Calzaghe.

I would question this assertion if you're stating it regarding a prime Hopkins. I don't think anyone could outrough Hopkins on the inside in his prime. He lived to fight on the inside.

[Marnoff]

Well, I don't think he would neccessarily get the best of Hopkins inside at all anywhere other than the middle of the ring possibly. But Hopkins against a fighter like that would try to put him against the ropes and rough-house him, making it so that he couldn't use any movement or speed, and would be forced into playing Hopkins's dirty games(sounds a bit off). He would likely try to tie him up and hit him low or as hard as he could and control the fight from the ropes, in close range, but you can't count out Calzaghe and just say he would impose his will like that. All comes down to who's style works out, and with two at this level, hard to tell, but again, I'll stick with Hopkins.

I like this assessment because it is clear that Calzaghe knows how to play to his advantages, but Hopkins has also shown this. After losing to Roy Jones, I believe Hopkins had learned quite a bit about dealing with speed, and I think he had a very fair shot at beating Calzaghe. I would make him something like 70% to win the fight if I was making the odds in my head. It would be a rough battle and like you said, a matter of who could get their style to work out in the heat of the moment.

[PrideOfWales]

IHopkins has been so lazy in so many fights

Calzaghe also had a tendancy to be lazy in a lot of fights too. Not so much recently but there were a few fights where he seemed to switch off for a couple of rounds.

[Marnoff]

Hopkins has been so lazy in so many fights

Recently? This is not a prime Hopkins.

[David UK]

Only a prime Jones beats Calzaghe. You can forget Hopkins

[LeedsLad]

Prime Jones at 168 beats him, possibly stops him. If a well conditioned and 100% focused Toney fought him he would have a good chance too. Outside of them two, i dont see any at 168-175 beating him.

[Manjanek]

I dont htink he beats Toney or Jones. I do think he beats B-hop.

We could have seen his clinic of Lacey earlier with a battle against Vinny Paz, eh? :)