Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Calzaghe haters need to STFU!!!

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    #81
    Originally posted by Dave Rado View Post
    That's called a "" (a straw man argument is an logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.)

    Calzaghe is legendary in purely British terms but not in world terms. No credible boxing historian would rate him outside the top 5 or so British fighters of all time, so in purely UK terms it's not a stretch to call him legendary. But no one other than really extreme nuthuggers would call him legendary in world terms. Nevertheless, most serious boxing historians would rate him near the bottom (inn the 80-100 range) of the ATG list - or a few would have him just outside the top 100 but only just outside it.

    If you define ATG as meaning the top 100 fighters of all time, then the majority of boxing historians would rate him as an ATG, but only near the bottom of the list. He is lower than Roy Jones in the list, and a lot lower than Hopkins. He can't be even mentioned in the same breath as top 50 ATG fighters like Leonard, and isn't even on the same planet as top 10 fighters like Ali. But to pretend that he isn't in or at least close to the top 100 of all time is just delusional.

    Legendary, though, implies being near the top of the list, and in those terms, he's only legendary in a purely UK context. No Calzaghe fan who knows anything about boxing would claim he's in the top 50 of the world ATG list or that he's legendary in world terms. So you're using a straw man argument.
    Probably the best post ever on this subject.

    I have him just outside top 100, but that doesn't mean he didn't fight the best he could given the situations he was in or that everyone or even the majority he fought was a no name bum.

    Comment

      #82
      Originally posted by hammerhiem View Post
      Probably the best post ever on this subject.

      I have him just outside top 100, but that doesn't mean he didn't fight the best he could given the situations he was in or that everyone or even the majority he fought was a no name bum.
      yea i think sven ottke was taking all the good opponents.

      Comment

        #83
        Originally posted by Chunk View Post
        Even though he's retired, you guys still try and **** on him with your bull**** hate threads. The people on here who know me, know that i'm not the biggest Calzaghe going but this is bull****!

        It's funny how much more i appreciated how good Calzaghe was until he retired, especially when you look at what's on show at 168-175. Calzaghe wold eat all of them, even this version of Calzaghe. Maybe Chad Dawson would give Calzaghe a tough fight but even that would end up a comfortable for the taff.

        Calzaghe's super skilled and a one-off. Real boxing fans will appreciate how good Calzaghe was and what he has achieved. Nearly all fighters should have done this and done that sooner, blah blah, but you can't just pin on Calzaghe, fess up.

        **** it! I want Calzaghe to come back. There, i said it!
        Give it up bro..he was a sloppy fighter...with a terrible resume.

        That cant be argued.

        Comment

          #84
          This has a lot to do with the "ball sack". Check out the Roberto Duran threads for an explanation! This dude has no one to blame but himself.

          Comment

            #85
            Originally posted by Michelin Man View Post
            You pretty much summed up RJ's 'career' right there
            Calzaghe fans are in no position to take the piss out of Roy's career either. Its better then Calzaghe's.

            Comment

              #86
              Originally posted by Gwap-iLL View Post
              Give it up bro..he was a sloppy fighter...with a terrible resume.

              That cant be argued.
              Sloppy fighters don't win 46 fights off the bat. His resume wasn't the greatest, but you could pick apart a lot of great fighters resumes. Calzaghe ran **** at 168 for near 12 years.

              Comment

                #87
                Originally posted by Chunk View Post
                Sloppy fighters don't win 46 fights off the bat. His resume wasn't the greatest, but you could pick apart a lot of great fighters resumes. Calzaghe ran **** at 168 for near 12 years.
                168 was just so stacked for 12 years as well.

                Comment

                  #88
                  Originally posted by BEEHOP View Post
                  168 was just so stacked for 12 years as well.
                  Didn't say it was, but he ran the show. Just like Bhop ran the show at a below par 160 divison for the same 12 years.

                  Comment

                    #89
                    Originally posted by Chunk View Post
                    Didn't say it was, but he ran the show. Just like Bhop ran the show at a below par 160 divison for the same 12 years.
                    Prime B-Hop, and prime Roy run circles around that stay at home mom. Don't ever use Roy, or B-Hops name in the same sentence as this clown.

                    Comment

                      #90
                      He got in the ring, won World Titles, fought at 2 weights, made over 20 defenses of a belt, traveled and fought outside his backyard. (Denmark, Germany and the US and Scotland and England, if you want to get technical)

                      He made alot of money and fought in front of some big crowds (50,000+ for the Kessler fight), he unified and defeated unbeaten fighters. He was universally recognised as the No.1 in his division for a long period of time. He fought through adversity and injury. (The fragile hands)

                      He retired unbeaten. I'd say that's a successful career.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP