<#webadvjs#>

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Better resume, Joe Calzaghe or Floyd Patterson?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Better resume, Joe Calzaghe or Floyd Patterson?

    I think that this is a valid question.

    Patterson was a very good fighter, but if we're only talking about the quality of opposition beaten, and we're taking defeats into account, then I feel that it's debateable which of them has the better resume.
    9
    Joe Calzaghe has the better resume
    22.22%
    2
    Floyd Patterson has the better resume
    66.67%
    6
    Pretty much even/very similar
    11.11%
    1

    #2
    At the end of the day joe has beaten Lacy and Kessler.

    Comment


      #3
      Why dont you just compare Joe Calzaghe's resume to a dinosaur?
      Wouldnt be anymore random than this one

      Comment


        #4
        i gotta give the slight edge to patterson, he beat the olympic gold medalist pete radamacher.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Hitman932 View Post
          i gotta give the slight edge to patterson, he beat the olympic gold medalist pete radamacher.
          I think Rademacher is still the only fighter to ever get a world title shot in his professional debut.

          Floyd Patterson had many very good wins though (Archie Moore, Ingemar Johansson, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Machen, Cooper, Durelle), he just wasn't meant to be a heavyweight.
          Lets put it this way, Patterson weighed the same as Joe Calzaghe does except he fought 200+ lb heavyweights.

          You could argue that he beat Jimmy Ellis, Jerry Quarry and Joey Maxim as well.

          Here's a video I made of Floyd Patterson:


          Uploaded by
          Last edited by TheGreatA; 09-28-2008, 07:51 PM.

          Comment


            #6
            Manchine, you think that Floyd's natural weight should be taken into consideration? I can agree that it should when considering his talents, but I'm undecided if it should when we're talking only about resume.

            For example if a fighter of George Foreman's size had beaten Moore at heavyweight, is that worth less than a fighter of Patterson's size doing it?

            Comment


              #7
              Who had a better career, TS Eliot or Jack Nicholson?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by UncleCuntington View Post
                Manchine, you think that Floyd's natural weight should be taken into consideration? I can agree that it should when considering his talents, but I'm undecided if it should when we're talking only about resume.

                For example if a fighter of George Foreman's size had beaten Moore at heavyweight, is that worth less than a fighter of Patterson's size doing it?
                I would say so.

                No one gives much credit to Frazier or Ali (both over 200 lbs) for beating Bob Foster while Archie Moore is one of the biggest wins on the records of Patterson and Marciano (both were around 180 lbs).

                Then again Archie Moore was also the number 1 ranked heavyweight when Marciano and Patterson were champions while Bob Foster was not.

                Moore became the number 1 HW when he defeated the 6'3, 210+ lb Nino Valdes who was previously ranked the number 1 HW. He had other good wins at heavyweight as well.

                Patterson and Moore were also ranked number 1 and 2 light heavyweights at the time.
                Last edited by TheGreatA; 09-28-2008, 08:16 PM.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by TheManchine View Post
                  I would say so.
                  No one gives much credit to Frazier or Ali (both over 200 lbs) for beating Bob Foster while Archie Moore is one of the biggest wins on the records of Patterson and Marciano (both were around 180 lbs).

                  Then again Archie Moore was also the number 1 ranked heavyweight when Marciano and Patterson were champions while Bob Foster was not.

                  Moore became the number 1 HW when he defeated the 6'3, 210+ lb Nino Valdes who was previously ranked the number 1 HW. He had other good wins at heavyweight as well.

                  Patterson and Moore were also ranked number 1 and 2 light heavyweights at the time.
                  Thanks for the info.

                  I have an old boxing book from the 1960s, which seems to rate Valdes highly and says that Marciano avoided him. I've never seen him fight, but his record doesn't suggest that he was the stand-out contender of that era IMO.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by UncleCuntington View Post
                    Thanks for the info.

                    I have an old boxing book from the 1960s, which seems to rate Valdes highly and says that Marciano avoided him. I've never seen him fight, but his record does not make him seem like the stand-out contender of that era though.
                    Valdes was the top ranked heavyweight contender from 1953 to 1955 when he defeated former HW champion Ezzard Charles along with other contenders such as James J Parker, Archie McBride and Tommy Jackson.

                    He had win streaks and losing streaks, after losing to Moore he lost many more fights until building himself back as a top heavyweight contender with wins over DeJohn, Holman, Erskine and Bethea.

                    Liston ended his boxing career in 3 rounds.


                    Here you can see the Ring ****zine HW ratings.

                    Valdes along with Bob Baker were two of the biggest heavyweights of the Marciano heavyweight era. It would've been interesting to see how Marciano would've dealt with them as they both were around 25-30 lbs bigger than Rocky.


                    Valdes against Marciano opponent Don ****ell
                    Last edited by TheGreatA; 09-28-2008, 08:43 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP