In response to the what Calzaghe's resume SHOULD have looked like thread...

[sunny31]

No, that argument doesn't apply to journeymen. That applies to all human beings. It's natural.

As for Pavlik I'm not insulting his courage. Give me a break. I'm just telling you what any boxing expert would see watching that fight. You can see it in his eyes. He realizes early that he's completely outclassed. That's why Bernard didn't get winded. It's much easier to beat on someone who isn't punching back.

If you know what you're talking about, tell me what ONE physical attribute /strategy Bernard used mainly to defeat Pavlik's youth and handspeed (no the answer is not Ring smarts, i'm talking about speed, power etc.)

And stop saying I like ever fighter....what? I do like Kessler well enough and Lacy. I have no grudge against either. Am I a fan ? No. But I think Kessler especially has potential. If you read some sort of bull**** forum psychology into that, that's your problem. I'm very honest about what I like and I don't like and don't give two ****s about what others on this forum think about me.

Facts are facts. That's all there is to it.

Bernard did to pavlik what he does against a lot of fighters, he controlled the distance kelly couldn't find his range with his jab and you can't land a right hand consistently unless you are either very fast or land that jab. I think Pavllik was surprised by hopkins power and speed also, and his footwork was too slow. Hopkins jumped off the ropes and clinched when he needed a breather, usual hopkins performance really.

[Roger Mellie]

Actually I've seen your other opinions. They are hilarious and usually based only on nationality.

We'll try this again, name some US fighters you like or respect.

Hearns,Rjj,Hagler,Williams,Winky,Pryor,Campbell... plenty others too,and many non British or american fighters.and your point is?

[sunny31]

No, that argument doesn't apply to journeymen. That applies to all human beings. It's natural.

As for Pavlik I'm not insulting his courage. Give me a break. I'm just telling you what any boxing expert would see watching that fight. You can see it in his eyes. He realizes early that he's completely outclassed. That's why Bernard didn't get winded. It's much easier to beat on someone who isn't punching back.

If you know what you're talking about, tell me what ONE physical attribute /strategy Bernard used mainly to defeat Pavlik's youth and handspeed (no the answer is not Ring smarts, i'm talking about speed, power etc.)

And stop saying I like ever fighter....what? I do like Kessler well enough and Lacy. I have no grudge against either. Am I a fan ? No. But I think Kessler especially has potential. If you read some sort of bull**** forum psychology into that, that's your problem. I'm very honest about what I like and I don't like and don't give two ****s about what others on this forum think about me.

Facts are facts. That's all there is to it.

Actually I've seen your other opinions. They are hilarious and usually based only on nationality.

We'll try this again, name some US fighters you like or respect.

yeah id say the wbo belt lacked credibility but I think sometimes the fighter makes the belt, by the time joe won it naseem hamed had put the wbo belt on the map. Like i said frank warren was a little to blame for this as he has big influence over the wbo. Would it have been any different if he had the wbc belt, if he had beyer or ottke probably would have had the wbo belt and still wouldn't have fought joe

[bsrizpac]

Bernard did to pavlik what he does against a lot of fighters, he controlled the distance kelly couldn't find his range with his jab and you can't land a right hand consistently unless you are either very fast or land that jab. I think Pavllik was surprised by hopkins power and speed also, and his footwork was too slow. Hopkins jumped off the ropes and clinched when he needed a breather, usual hopkins performance really.

The answer was actually timing. He figured out that Pavlik fights in a very basic rhythm with no plan B, and just exploited it over and over again.

There were some range elements of a Hopkins fight, but it was not a usual Hopkins fight in that he looked more like Hopkins vs. Tito. His stamina did not come into play for the reasons I already told you.

You are correct about him using the Ropes.

[bsrizpac]

yeah id say the wbo belt lacked credibility but I think sometimes the fighter makes the belt, by the time joe won it naseem hamed had put the wbo belt on the map. Like i said frank warren was a little to blame for this as he has big influence over the wbo. Would it have been any different if he had the wbc belt, if he had beyer or ottke probably would have had the wbo belt and still wouldn't have fought joe

A fighter can make a belt, but not back then. I mean again, I think it takes several fighters and more of a legacy. Now that it's been around a while and a few more legit champs are fighting for it, I can see better arguments that it's a legit belt now.

i do think that having that belt didn't help Joe's ability to unify earlier.

[sunny31]

The answer was actually timing. He figured out that Pavlik fights in a very basic rhythm with no plan B, and just exploited it over and over again.

There were some range elements of a Hopkins fight, but it was not a usual Hopkins fight in that he looked more like Hopkins vs. Tito. His stamina did not come into play for the reasons I already told you.

You are correct about him using the Ropes.

Don't talk down to me

Pavlik is always one paced against every fighter, there are a lot of one paced fighters that are still good fighters, I agree hopkins was timing him well but its mainly because pavlik was constantly falling short with his jab, jermain taylor was much more effective with his double jab against hopkns. Also kelly doesn't possess taylor's speed

I think pavlik underestimated hopkins. I think everyone did off the back of the calzaghe fight, but joe is an all round better fighter than pavlik

[bsrizpac]

Don't talk down to me

Pavlik is always one paced against every fighter, there are a lot of one paced fighters that are still good fighters, I agree hopkins was timing him well but its mainly because pavlik was constantly falling short with his jab, jermain taylor was much more effective with his double jab against hopkns. Also kelly doesn't possess taylor's speed

I think pavlik underestimated hopkins. I think everyone did off the back of the calzaghe fight, but joe is an all round better fighter than pavlik

Taylor never really landed the double jab against Hopkins, it just kept him at bay. That and as you mentioned Taylor's speed. But even against him in the later rounds Hopkins timed him and figured him out too. It was just easier because of the way Kelly fights.

Of course Joe is better than Pavlik, i think most people knew that already.

[Abstraction]

Pavlik has taken several more risks in his career than Joe has, which is why most members here respect Pavlik more than Joe. (if they respect joe at all).

This has little to do with Nationality, if it is, you're a racist idiot. Im British, and i'll say it, Joe is a disappointing waste of talent. If you don't fight the best, fair enough, it's your choice, just don't play the "Legend" card

[S A M U R A I]

Pavlik has taken several more risks in his career than Joe has, which is why most members here respect Pavlik more than Joe. (if they respect joe at all).

Plenty of people here respect Joe Calzaghe. There's no need to exaggerate and suggest nobody does.

I notice your views are quite extreme. You often seem to post nothing but hatred, therefore in my opinion you are no more respectable than the Calzaghe fans with extreme views, only you're at the opposite end of the spectrum.

There's a serious lack of balanced posters on these forums.



| |

[bsrizpac]

Plenty of people here respect Joe Calzaghe. There's no need to exaggerate and suggest nobody does.

I notice your views are quite extreme. You often seem to post nothing but hatred, therefore in my opinion you are no more respectable than the Calzaghe fans with extreme views, only you're at the opposite end of the spectrum.

There's a serious lack of balanced posters on these forums.

I think the American posters do tend to overall not respect Joe. Some do however..