Was Joe Calzaghe really that great?
October 3rd, 2009
By Liam Santiago: If I asked you to name five great fighters that Joe Calzaghe beat to cement his name in boxing history, who would you say? Kessler must be one. Hopkins, Eubank, although both past their best. That is about where it ends. Personally, I am a massive fan of Calzaghe and his style but did he really challenge himself against the best? Will he be remembered for his undefeated record or the names that are not on his record?
Although he was on the world stage, Calzaghe never really gripped the hearts of the British public the way fellow Britain Ricky Hatton did. It was not until 2006 when Calzaghe stepped up to face the ‘new Mike Tyson’, Jeff Lacy. This was the career defining fight for the Welsh man. According to the press Lacy was a machine. Untouchable. Lacy was beaten over twelve rounds by Calzaghe and has never really lived up to his hype. He has since been easily beaten by Jermaine Taylor and an ageing Roy Jones Jnr. So, as we look back now, that bout was in no way ‘career defining’.
The skill and talent is obvious with Calzaghe, his biggest downfall was getting him to fight. Names that could replace the likes of Saskio Bika and Peter Manfredo on his record are Jermaine Taylor, Winky Wright, Chad Dawson, Glenn Johnson, Kelly Pavlik and Carl Froch. However, he did claim a good win against solid champion Mikell Kessler. Kessler was unbeaten and held the titles Calzaghe wanted. However, Kessler is not that good. Saying this will shock many people but who has beat? He is a good comparison to the Kotelnik of the light welterweight division. Good at everything but not great.
After Kessler came Bernard Hopkins. I saw Hopkins as the winner, but hey, that’s boxing. But, Calzaghe should be winning clearly against a 45 year old man whom he had to low blow. After Hopkins Calzaghe snuffed a bout against Pavlik or Dawson or a rematch against Hopkins and fought an old Roy Jones Jnr.
Calzaghe has had a long career which has been stretched out against mostly B, C and even D class fighters. Another fighter who gets much crtitism for his level of opposition is Floyd Mayweather. Floyd might not have fought everybody at the top, but he certainly has fought tough opposition. Lets remember Calzaghe did not retire as a champion. He had to vacate his belts because he would have had to fight the elite at the end of his career.
I just think Calzaghe might be remembered for what he did not do rather than what he did do.
Tags: 72 Responses to “Was Joe Calzaghe really that great?”
Leave a Reply
please use above banner to link back to us!
since calzaggi retired ,hopkins has been winning. Another calzagghi victim the very capable kesseler, beat a very tough carl froch.carl froch has beat jean pascal and jean pascal had beaten bad chad dawson all of the above are good and great fighters but none of them are as great a fighter as 46 and 0 joe calzagghi
I DONT THINK CALZAGHE COULD HAVE BEATEN; HAGLER, OR SUGAR RAY ROBINSON, OR MICHAEL SPINKS, OR EVANDER HOLLYFIELD AS A LIGHT HEAVY WEIGHT , OR CARLOS MONZONE
BUT THEN AGAIN JOE CALZAGHE HAD A GREAT CHIN AND THE HEART OF A LION, AND HE WAS A GREAT COUNTER PUNCHER WITH INCREDIBLE BOXING INSTINCTS , AND HE THREW COMBINATIONS , WORKED THE BODY AND HE WAS UNDEFEATED.I WOULD HAVED LOVED TO SEE HAGLER AND JOE AT 160 WHOA WHAT FEROCIOUS FIGHT. A FIGHT THAT COULD HAVE ENDED BOTH OF TEIR CAREERS. CALZAGHE DESTROYED LEFT HOOK LACY , AND LACY HIT AS HARD AS DWIGHT MOHAMED QUIOEE (THE CAMDEN BUZZ SAW/ AKA DONALD BRAXTON). AND JOES STYLE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN HIM INSIDE AGAINST M SPINKS. BUT CARLOS MONZONE WAS A KILLER ,SO THAT FIGHT WOULD HAVE BEEN A KAMAKAZE MISSION, BUT SUGAR RAY ROBINSON , HE WOULD HAVE DANCED , STICK AND MOVE AND EASILY OUT POINTED MIGHTY JOE CALZAGH AND ROBINSONS LIGHTENING COMBINATIONS MAY HAVE KO D JOE. JOE CALZAGHE WAS ONE OF GREATEST CHAMPIONS IN BOXING HISTORY, HOWEVER CALZAGHE DID NOT HAVE TO FIGHT OTHER GREATEST OF ALL TIME FIGHTERS LIKE; SUGAR RAY LEONARD VS THOMAS HEARNS OR SUGAR RAY ROBINSON VS CARMEN BACILLIO , OR JAKE LAMOTA, MARVIN HAGLER VS THOMAS HEARNS.WHO IS TO SAY WHA TWOULD HAPPEN
Joe beat every one he ever fought for 15yrs and held titles in 2 differentweight classes beat so many good fighters,kessler mitchel, brewer. eubank,bika , THATS WHAT GREAT FIGHTERS DO. he ruined the fAVORTIE LACY BY HITTING HM OVER A THOUSAND TIMES IN THAT FIGHT,LACYS CORNER SHOULD HAVE STOPPED THAT FIGHT 5 RDS BEFORE BECAUSE THAT FIGHT RUINED LACYS CARRER THEY JUST UNDER RATED CALZAGHI EVEN AS HE WAS RUINNING LACY ENDING HIS CARRER. HOPKINS WAS RATED NO 1 PD FOR POUND HE BEAT TRAVER LOST TO CALZAGHI THEN BEAT PAVLIK HE WAS ONLY OLD AGAINST CALZAGHI JOE PUT ON A SHOW AGAINST A OLDER ROY jONES THE RETIRED AT 36, iF HAGGLER HEARNS LEONARD AND DURAN ARE GREAT SO IS jOE cALZAGHI
im british and agree he fought nobodys as zero power slaps dosnt punch hes a complete phoney this guy dosnt come anywere near sugar ray hearns hagler duran if this guy fought a middleweight who could actualy punch he would of lost disgrace!
Great picture of the infamous pitty pat puncher on his overrated a**.
this is for calzaghe fans that think hes good. c,mon guys are you all just been contaminated by perez and isanetiago. calzaghe will never be great. not to me at all
why joe didnt fight glen jonhson? he postpond it twice! also he very chinny remember mitchell dropped him then all of sudden fight stopped both past prime jones,bhop dropped him all im saying a lot of his fights stopped early evn manfredo no tarver adamek orb level fighers likegonzalez,briggs,telesco young guys calzaghe borderline hof
thank god hes retired. i used to fall asleep watching his fights
what a load of blah blah blah!
joe you are the champ.
you americans cant get over the fact he destroyed 3 of your top fighters.you have to live with that! too bad.. boo hoo stop crying
calzaghe, i wont even watch any of his fights. its so boring even when he showboats.im just happy he retired ,boxing is better off without him.he is one example on how boxing is corrupt.
One of the most ignorant, bias articles i have read in years. Shows a clear lack of understanding, extremely poor.
Did it not ever cross your mind that the fighters you mention ducked calzaghe?!
RJJ, hopkins, taylor, pavlik etc wanted nothing to do with calzaghe before he hit 35
It would be more a constuctive and balanced debate to pick out fighters and ask if they had the ability to beat Calzaghe. To simply proclaim someone overrated is a bit much! I feel whoever he fought or didnt fight, you could put a strong case to say he would still be champion regardless of opponent. The argument that so and so would have beaten him will always come back to “Well Lacy was gonna blow him away…” Pointless debate
True calzaghe retired undefeated but only because he fought nobodys.And tyson is considered great because he knocked out mostly everybody he stepped in the ring with.Tyson had great punching power and he did fight the best in his division like holyfield,lewis,spinks,witherspoon and ruddock.These fighters were all champions and if joe were to have fought the best then he would maybe considered great.Maybe if he had any punching power and knocked everybody on their a** like tyson did then maybe just maybe the rest of the boxing world would consider him a great fighter and thats why we criticize joes career.We don’t hate joe we just speak the truth about his pitty pat career.And we have been over joe because he is retired but i’m personally sick of all you calzaghe b*ll l*ckers calling him a legend because hes not so you need to get over it.
People mentioning tyson,sugar ray,holyfield and many other great fighters but they were all beat. lets just say Tyson for instance who did he fight that was so special fat berbick or larry holmes but will always be remembered for being great. Calzaghe fought with dodgy hands and couldnt get anyone to fight him and thats the reason he fought nobodys. He wanted jones in his prime but he didnt want to know, ottke wouldnt fight him. I think he should have gone on and fought dawson but he probably knew it could have been his first defeat, personally i think calzaghe would have won but if he did lose all you calzaghe haters would have forgotten his age and said he got found out or fought on to long.
WHO WOULD OF BEAT HIM YE LOAD OF NOBS?
if Joe was American i bet he would be a great then ?
And another thing, just because boxers have never been defeated does not make them amazing, Look at the best boxers of all time, Mike Tyson, Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis, Roberto Duran, “Sugar” Ray Robinson and Jack Dempsey, all of them considered the best ever of their divisions and not one of them were undefeated, all of them were undefeated for a while but came back better than ever after their first defeat, i believe if calzaghe had lost to hopkins or jones jr then we might have seen a more better, dangerous, focused greater Joe Calzaghe
Personally i believe Calzaghe was an excellent fighter but, his legacy is tarnished by history, he never had a great range of opponents to choose from, the calzaghe-eubank match is just like the marciano-louis match, both eubank and louis well past their best, both marciano and calzaghe were never beaten and anybody who knows anything about boxing will agree that louis would have taken marcaino in his prime and eubank would have taken calzaghe if he were in his former ferocious self.
But Lets be frank Calzaghe is a great boxer but has never given himself the chance to be put to the limit.
Was Joe Calzaghe Great? – Yes
Was he the best? – Yes
Was he as unbeatable as he made himself out to be? – No
His record sounds good at first glance but a closer look proves, he was great but not unbeatable
What have I accoplished. 400 amatur fights! 76 as a pro!
Why did he avoid Chad Dawson?
I agree with this article. Calzaghe’s opposition has been overall fairly weak. In addition, he was given a gift against (an aged) Bernard Hopkins.
Totally agree, Calzaghe should have chased a fight with Eubank in his prime, about the same time as Calzaghe was a 18 year old ABA Champion and yet to make his professional debut. Makes total sense.
As for Hopkins, a fight was signed for and the next morning B-Hop came back asking for £20m or there would be no fight, and Jones Jnr in his prime was obviously making waves in the Light Heavyweight Division fighting, Woods, Kelly, Gonzalez, Harmon, Harding, Hall et al!
Everyone has bums on their record, at the end of the day, the American Elite’s didn’t want to risk it, and lose the cash cow fund that HBO threw at them. I mean if Howard Eastman can get a fight against Hopkins I think just about anyone could get one, but why not Joe I wonder?
Calzaghe vs………………………
to j lander, froch wasn’t a big name at the time and only got himself heard by constantly calling out joe, froch only got famous after winning his title and beating taylor, and although the fight may have sold out wembley how many ppvs would it have sold in america ?….. none and thats where the big money is. and froch would lose a one sided u.d to calzaghe
j lander, another biased idiot that isn’t applying the same rules to the americans
to anon. your just moving the goalposts like the critics. why should joe relinquish his long held world titler to move up and down weight, besides why would he weight drain himself to face middleweights? lol. and name me these better fighters? i cant see who these people are that your refering too. if you mean pavlik then he was destroyed by b hop who joe beat, taylor was beaten by pavlik and froch, calzaghe would beat froch in a one sided u.d. and you say about people’s primes ignoring the fact that joe was 36 himself and had lost power because of brittle hands
calzaghe was good,but not great,he stayed in wales zzzzzz’s was too scared to fight anywhere else,and waited for roy jns jnr and bernhard hopkins to be drawing there pensions before he fought them,,,then makes out carl froch wasnt a big enough name,even tho that fight would have sold out wembley stadium at least twice over…facts are he was scared stiff of froch who would have demolished calzaghe in 5-7 brutal rounds…stay retired joe for your own health!!!
the biggest point is that not only did calzaghe beat his opponents, he gave most of them an absolute boxing lesson. jeff lacy has never been the same since. everyone can keep naming names but i very much doubt there was anyone in joes weight that he wouldn’t have beat
and how do you work out that nobody knew kessler?. i knew who kessler was and so should any boxing fan. joe was world champ so these people should have been coming to challenge him not the other way round, you saying he should move up and down and fly around! lol. how maoy americans do that?. not a lot because don king cant pay off the judge’s outside america
to anon. no joe wasn’t favourite, and why should he move up and down weight and fly all over?. ill ask the questions again seeing as everyone ignores it. why does jones get huge credit when he wouldn’t leave america or fight the best british champions like benn and collins even though benn offered to fight jones in his own back yard for free, and collins retired because jones wouldn’t face him yet jones is hailed as a great but calzaghe is not
i agree with the article, i thought he had the skills to maybe do more with his career, but he himself probably didnt think he could, thats y he never left britain till the guys he was gona be fighting wer not in their primes.
and to the people talking about klitchkos there not that great either but the difference is they are stuck in the 1 division with little talent,so its not all there fault. Calzaghe on the other hand could have went up and down in weight to get better fighters to face him but he didnt.
also to ANONYMOUS- u say he wasnt given a chance against so and so,but infact other than lacy he was favourite against kessler,hopkins and jones i believe.nobody even knew kessler..well c what hes made off in this upcoming tournment.
to axel bowen dale, i totally agree, and wlads record is even worse and hes been beaten by two not so brilliant fighters but yet the klitschkos are highly rated by everyone and hailed as greats. but a brit boxer cant get credit for anything and always has to face flawed criticism like this article, they said joe didn’t stand a chance against most fighters he faced but he beat them so the critics moved the goalposts and said oh but he wouldn’t beat other fighters like froch and pavlik, yet these same critics are calling froch. brits just cant win
to chuck, calzaghe beat hopkins and hopkins easily beat pavlik so pavlik wasn’t much of an opponent, froch and dawson were not big name big money fights at the time which joe wanted for the end of his career. joe retired aged 36, are you saying that he should just carry on and on and on no matter how old he is?. because there will always be an opponent up and coming, so if joe had fought froch and dawson and retired then people would say he didnt fight dirrell and ward. so should a fighter just continue until they are old and eventually get beat by a much younger guy?. dont be ridiculous
sick ov hearing about jc he as retired move on n write about something else ps he made a joke of himself not fighting b hopkins again and beeing called out a load of times by carl frotch claming ther was no1 for him 2 fight haha pavlick carl frotch bhop dawson wer all aponants 4 him
why is it always brit fighters getting this stick, why will nobody answer the fact that hall of famer roy jones totally avoided all britains best when he was in his prime?. nigel benn offered him the full purse and home advantage and he turned it down but is still never questioned like calzaghe, joe beat all the people that was around so what is the problem. he wasn’t given a hope in hell to beat lacey, kessler, jones or hopkins but yeat when he did everyone then says these guys were no good or past it. why is it that american fighters can get credit for doing nothing but brit boxers never get credit no matter what they do. dirrell for instance is a prime example being hailed as the best super middle in the world but for what exactly? . just for having fast hands or gaining a bronze medal?. its a joke
Was Joe Calzaghe that great? you ask.
Liam,is this not same man you rated not so long ago at number 6 in your all-time greatest fighters?,ahead of Armstrong,Leonard,Hagler,Pep?
According to you then Eubank,Kessler & Hopkins were all impressive names he beat.
Now suddenly you believe he had no real career defining fights and even lost the Hopkins bout!
Make your mind up Liam!
I agree Reptile. It was not like he did not have the options.
Kessler was not a big win for Calzaghe. He is a basic fighter. Good at everyhting but not great at anything. Like Kotelnik.
Is that so Mr T? Just a pity he didn’t illustrate the range and footwork you describe against a recognised top fighter in his prime.
In case you haven’t been paying attention for the last ten years or so, Lacy is not/never was a top fighter.
Perhaps you’ve been smoking the pipe yourself?
Long live boxing, Reptile.
very good but not great!
what!! you guys been smoking the pipe?
against jeff lacy was one of the best examples of range and footwork you’l ever see!
Eubank,Jones and Hopkins are definitely three of the all time greats, it’s just that Eubank was past his best and the Hopkins and Jones fights took place ten years too late. Had Calzaghe beat them in thier prime this article wouldn’t have even been written but he didn’t, just like he didn’t fight the (then) awsome prime Jermain Taylor, the (then) undefeated Kelly Pavlik or the dangerous “Bad” Chad Dawson.
Though it pains me to say it the only prime top level opponents Calzaghe ever beat were Kessler and Jeff Lacey, two great fighters but hardly two victories that secure Joe a place alongside the likes of Sugar Ray, Marvin Hagler, Tommy Hearns, Jake LaMotta, Roberto Duran, Bernard Hopkins, Nigel Benn, Chris Eubank, Bernard Hopkins and Roy Jones to name but a few of history’s greatest middleweights.
Joe was a very good fighter with fantastic technical ability but perhaps he falls just a little short of the Hall of Fame.
Oli, thatis exactly true. What has Kessler ever done?
Interesting article which makes some valid points, particularly in terms of most of calzaghe’s big wins being over fighters who were either over-rated or long past their best. Crucially his two most famous wins were against Hopkins and Jones.
Basically Calzaghe waited till the pair had a combined age of 80+ before fighting them. Even then Calzaghe suffered knockdowns aginst each and, quite frankly, did not have the punch to return the compliment in either fight if they’d lasted 100 rounds.
Jones had previously been clean knocked out by what are considered fairly ordinary fighters yet the great Calzaghe never came close to stopping the once talented but by then horribly ringworn Jones. Fact is had Joe been brave/stupid enoght to have fought Hopkins or Jones at anything like their prime he’d have been beaten easily. And that exactly why he didn’t fight them. Its not rocket science folks! Calzaghe was a good fighter, definitely. great fighter? definitely not.
Truth is there are many people out there who are hardcore calzaghe fans but only very casual boxing fans. in truth its a sad indictment of the state of the sweet science in recent years that anyone, however ill informed, should use the name ‘Calzaghe’ and the term ‘great fighter’ in the same sentnce. But sadly, thats where we are.
Yours in sport, Reptile.
I get sick and tired of hearing from
I accept that it no doubt has some padding, but then again whose doesn’t?
have anyone here thought about if kessler loses the tourament. that would make joes best win seem like nothing. u jc fans just can’t accept that joes record is padded. i am british and i can accept that joes record is padded it just makes me laugh how many people can’t see that.
Amazing how nobody has mentioned the likes of Mario Veit or Robin Reid hell even Mitchell should have been mentioned. Calzaghe had fantastic footwork, hand speed and, in his earlier days, power which he proved time and time again in every one of his 46 fights.
He beat RJJ and Hopkins when all three were out of their prime, yet look at them, still destroying the likes of Lacy and Pavlik. You mentioned his possible opponents, but why would he fight content middleweights such as Jermaine Taylor, Winky Wright and Kelly Pavlik. Dawson and Johnson were Light Heavies and everyone knew Calzaghe was only having a couple of fights when he got there, so why wouldn’t he take a big purse bout?
When Kessler wins the Super Six, with no doubt retaining that one loss record, everyone will see that he’s also a great champion.
Its about time someone speaks out on how joe calzaghe is not a great fighter.He is overrated bigtime and i can’t believe on how so many people are fooled by this brit,he retired when his division was getting heated up.He has never beaten an elite fighter and if you give him credit for lacy and kessler then you are a fool.Lacy was hyped and highly overrrated for not beaten anybody.And for kessler no one had even heard of him until he foght joe.All of you calzaghe fans want to think of your boy as a legend too bad cause vthat ain’t happening.You are not gonna be remembered as a legend for beating overrated fighters and old men past their prime.Holyfield,delahoya,duran,hagler,and chavez are legends because they fought the best.So sorry calzaghe fans your boy was ok but not great and nowhere near legendary status.You can’t pitty pat your way to those great legendary fighters joe.
i agree with Jason,the most overrated boxer in history.
The Man from Del Monte told me, “You can’t pick the odd man out, but you can pick the old man out.” He said, “It’s a case of cherry picking at its finest.”
Like i said before and i will ssay it again,Calzaghe is the most overrated boxer in the history of the sport!! a fraud
a fake and a phoney!
Why!!! oh why do people regard kessler so highly? Nobody in britain or USA heard of him before he fought calzaghe, he has had ONE meaningful fight in is career wich he lost so where his reputation comes from il never quite know, all he does is fight bums in denmark.
Now..as far as the division he was in joe calzaghe did all he could do and he beat every possible supermiddleweight out there and unified all 4 belts so u can only respect him for that. At lightheavyweight he got the win against hopkins which u cannot say is not worthy of credit when u consider what hopkins did to the much touted pavlik. Calzaghe would have murdered dawson so theres no point bringing him up. Apart from fight carl froch recently there is not a lot more calzaghe could have done whether u think his division was strong or not so respect where respect is due
where is santiagon how come he’s not answering his readers comments!!! that’s right he has no answer
santiago is mexican not american!
americans are jealous
British boxers generally suck, actually.
Joe Calzaghe really sucked. But then again, the super middleweight division has always been lacking talent– with the exception of middleweights moving up, super middlewights are rather droll. Relative to the droll, then sure, Slappy Calzaghy was quite great.
Stevie you need to WATCH the fight instead of guessing what happened. You can’t win a fight by holding, headbutting and giving an oscar winning performance of how to lie down in the most dramatic fasion! Joe won end of thats what the record books say thats what the majority of people think except for some people who can’t actually back up what they claim with FACTS. Joe was an excellent boxer not the best ever but will most definately be remembered as one of the best boxers britain has ever produced.
addendum: are u a masochist enjoying to be ridiculed?!!
just a good question?? santiago how come 99.99999%of people responding to your articles disagreeing with you?!!! I mean a lot of people find you obnoxious and incompetent about your knowledge of boxing why? please answer honestly??
they’re both marquez nut huggers
liam you are so biased its unbelievable your as bad as manuel perez.
I get bored of the Calzaghe isn’t that good arguments. They are usually completely flawed.
First, Calzaghe’s quality of opposition. He fought and beat 9 current or former world champions. People also seem to forget that he was the underdog in many of those fights – against Eubank and Lacy big time. against Omar Sheika and by many against Kessler, Hopkins and Jones. He beat all of them. Jones and Hopkins are Hall of Famers. Yes they were past their primes but so was Calzaghe – he was in his later 30′s when he fought them and couldn’t punch with any power due to his brittle hands and his handspeed had degraded.
Yes, he defended against some bums but what champs haven’t? Look at Joe Louis’ career. The bum of the month club? Yet Louis beat some good men – some at the end of their careers and people quite rightly remember his skills as legendary. I find it amusing how the people who criticize Calzaghe’s career don’t write articles hating on Rocky Marciano who was a great heavyweight Champion. Who did he beat exactly? A way past it Walcott and Charles and a blown up and old Archie Moore? Yet Marciano is regarded as an all time great heavyweight – rightly because he was, as Calzaghe is a great fighter too.
It is also obvious to see from watching Calzaghe how good he was. He had an irresistible combination of hand speed, workrate, stamina, chin, toughness and adaptability as well as ring smarts and a tremendous heart to fight back when hurt. You only need to watch Manny Seward commentating on the Kessler fight and hear him astounded at Calzaghe’s skills and Kellerman calling Calzaghe a ‘special fighter’ to see what the experts think.
No, Calzaghe was a great fighter who always found a way to win against some pretty damn good opponents. It’s a quite an achievement to go undefeated in 46 fights and defend your supermiddleweight belt over 20 times. The same criticisms that have been levelled at Calzaghe could be levelled at many great fighters throughout history. It is unfair and narrow sighted to pick solely on Calzaghe.
Second,
like i said before mike mccallum James tony chris eubank Nigel Ben Michael Watson Iran barkley Steve Collins Gerald mclaren earoll graham Doug dueitt Byron Mitchell and bhop didn’t fight any off them ?but still a legend?and in his fight against Joe he done very well in defending him self but f..k all to win it and as for Jones how many sh.t mandatories did he build his legacy on and why did he do his best to avoid Ben eubank Collins Barkley oh well another American turning a blind eye to the FACTS
im sorry, but how can you say joe had to resort to low blows to win? there was one that i can remember, and it sure as hell wasnt low, it was on the belt. hopkins just needed the rest.
what a granny grunt
mexican nut huggers
and what elite are you taliking about liam? kessler and lacy were regarded as the best and joe beat them, pavlik was beaten by b hop who was beaten by calzaghe so pavlik offered no challenge or money. froch beat taylor and calzaghe would have destroyed froch in a one sided u.d . so who else was left at super middle? nobody thats who. joe vacated the super middle because there wasn’t a challenge or big money fight left so he got two big american names at light heavyweight to make some big retirement funds. good luck to him
yes calzaghe was a world champion when he retired because he held the ring light heavyweight belt, and that is just as meaningful or meaningless as the alphabet titles how ever you want to look at it
another one! come on now, just move on guys. Is the sport of boxing so stale that you have to keep going back to this story?
dirrell is being hailed as the new superman just like lacy was and when froch beats him he wont get any credit for it just like calzaghe didn’t for beating lacy. and then we will get articles on how ward is the real superman and froch stands no chance and it will go on and on! boring
why do we keep hearing this rubbish about brit boxers from american based writers?. why does roy jones get so much credit when he totally avoided people like steve collins and nigel benn, even though benn offered jones the full purse and a home advantage, even lennox lewis still doesn’t get the credit he deserves