Joe Calzaghe

nacho libre

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/boxing/7871918.stm

bikki

Sure and why not, 46 for 46 and champ for 11 years.

No point in continuing fighting and risk becoming a cabbage when uve got nothing to prove to anybody.

Top Champion in my book.

amacachi

Fair play, bowing out at the top.

syngindub

I'm telling you now. He'll be back. money talks

sligobhoy67

syngindub wrote: »

I'm telling you now. He'll be back. money talks

just like Lennox? :rolleyes:

There is no one left to fight.

Plenty of negatives in his career - and its easy to pick wholes in his achievement but nonetheless he has been at the top for a long time and remained unbeaten.

HercHauk

Thank god that draftdodging sonfabitch Retired. I dislike him more then any other fighter.

sligobhoy67

HercHauk wrote: »

Thank god that draftdodging sonfabitch Retired. I dislike him more then any other fighter.

why?

syngindub

Sometimes it's unbelievable how we can begrudge sports people and their achievements. The guy is an absolute boxing fanatic and lived his dream. Fair play to him for not choosing the easy path in life. His ultimate love for the sport may bring him back though i think.

duagre

Good riddance

syngindub

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

just like Lennox? :rolleyes:

Lennox was in this game for the same reasons as Eubank and many others.

redout

Calzaghe was a top fighter no doubt. Pity the Collins fight never materialised. The wins over Kessler, Hopkins and Jones have given him a solid ending to his career.

sligobhoy67

syngindub wrote: »

Lennox was in this game for the same reasons as Eubank and many others.

which was what exactly?

syngindub

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

which was what exactly?

cash

sligobhoy67

syngindub wrote: »

cash

so what is your point in relation to Calzaghe?

And if Lewis was just there for the cash why did he retire when he did?

syngindub

my point is this.
Calzaghe WILL be back from retirement because of his pure love of the sport and his ultimate dedication.
Lewis will never be back. he was in the game for different reasons

sligobhoy67

syngindub wrote: »

my point is this.
Calzaghe WILL be back from retirement because of his pure love of the sport and his ultimate dedication.
Lewis will never be back. he was in the game for different reasons

fair enough. I dont agree though.

joepenguin

A farewell fight this side of the world would have been nice. A fight with Dawson would have put an end to the negative remarks, but at 37 he has nothing left to prove. If he was 31/32 then yes he should fight Dawson, but the fact remains that Calzaghe left the sport no too far off his prime.

He had a fantastic career, lets not forget it was Hopkins that pulled out of a fight with him a few years back when he was considered in his prime (look what he dd to pavlik months after calzaghe though) and Eubank was a dangerous replacement for Collins. He didnt dodge anyone but was well matched. Any time a gamble was taken with an opponent, eg Lacy, Kessler, Hopkins, he came out the winner.

I will certainly miss his fights and all the debates that went along with them about style etc.

nacho libre

http://www.setanta.com/uk/Articles/other-sports/2009/02/05/Boxing-Froch-on-Calzaghe/gnid-38896/

mean while Froch keeps running his mouth. i give him credit for a great fight last year with Pascal but seriously what a muppet the guy is. if Taylor doesn't humble in the ring Kessler will. then he'll maybe realise why Calzaghe never fought him.

eagle eye

Well for me he has been the greatest pound for pound boxer ever to come from Europe.

A great fighter and a great man, its great to see him retire now undefeated and still in great health.

Big Ears

syngindub wrote: »

cash

I suppose that's why after reaching the quarter finals of the 1984 Olympics he turned pro...........wait no he didn't, he stayed amateur for another 4 years just so he could have the honour of being an Olympic champion.

Then when the time was right(from a boxing point of view) to retire he did, turning down the chance to make millions.

He also faced the hardest opposition available at almost every turn, when he probably could of milked up fighting weak contenders. I've never seen any indication that Lewis was just in it for the money.

T-K-O

A wise move from Calzaghe. Joe will always be criticised for his early career but he did finish strong, there will always be some other guy to beat and you gotta call time eventually.

BTW - Joe IMO would easily defeat Froch, Carl is a decent fighter but Joe for me is on the next level.

Running Bing

20, 30 years from now JC will be looked at as a fighting god!

46-0, two weight world champion who beat Roy Jones Junior and Bernard Hopkins:eek::eek::eek:

Nobody will care in 30 years time that they were both past their best and a large number of those 46 wins came against nobodies.

I dont think JC was as good as his legacy will probably come to suggest but you have to give him massive credit and respect. A tremendous professional, incredibly smart in managing his career (even now retiring at the perfect time imo.....and he wont be back) and he always did what was required of him and beat what was put in front of him.


Cant say I was a huge fan of his style but Ill always look on him favourably and he was definitely amongst the greatest European fighters ever.

T-K-O

BS.

I was at the Jones fight but I do not give Joe that much credit for beating him. Joe's early career will always bring out the doubters.

walshb

I think a distinction should be made between Rocky and Cal. Rocky holds the most famous record in sports history. 49-0. It is the most famous because it was in the Heavyweight division; which was sports richest prize.

Now, Cal is undefeated, as was Lopez; but both are just undefeated lower weight fighters. What makes Rocky's so special is the fact it was in the
premier division.

Cal and Lopez hold great records. Rocky holds D record!

So, Cal is never inching towrads the record. It is not breakable unless you
are the heavyweight champion of the world.

Lazlo Papp retired undefeated, as did many others. They aren't in the same
league as Rocky in terms of record prestige!

T-K-O

walshb wrote: »

I think a distinction should be made between Rocky and Cal. Rocky holds the most famous record in sports history. 49-0. It is the most famous because it was in the Heavyweight division; which was sports richest prize.

Now, Cal is undefeated, as was Lopez; but both are just undefeated lower weight fighters. What makes Rocky's so special is the fact it was in the
premier division.

Cal and Lopez hold great records. Rocky holds D record!

So, Cal is never inching towrads the record. It is not breakable unless you
are the heavyweight champion of the world.

Lazlo Papp retired undefeated, as did many others. They aren't in the same
league as Rocky in terms of record prestige!

You boys will be shocked to hear I totally disagree. Calzaghes opponents prevent him from over taking Rocky.

If he somehow manage to beat Benn, defeat Eubank a year or so earlier add that to wins against B-Hop and Jones 6 or 7 years ago and it would be hard to argue against Clazaghe being the best undefeated fighter ever.

walshb

T-K-O wrote: »

You boys will be shocked to hear I totally disagree. Calzaghes opponents prevent him from over taking Rocky.

If he somehow manage to beat Benn, defeat Eubank a year or so earlier add that to wins against B-Hop and Jones 6 or 7 years ago and it would be hard to argue against Clazaghe being the best undefeated fighter ever.

I'm not with you?

My point is that Rocky's record is unique in the sense that it belongs
to the Heavyweight division. It is ONLY open to the heavyweight champion of the world.

Joe's record can go to 100-0; it's still a separate record. It's
a record in the lower weight divisions. That's the distinction
I wanted to make!

Rocky's record is the most famous ACROSS the whole
sporting world. It is that prestigious, as was the title of world heavyweight champion, back in the day!

It has ZERO to do with who is the best undefeated fighter. It's a record distinction I am
making; that's all!

Rocky's record eclipses Ali; but IMO, Ali is the greatest fighter ever.

The greatest RECORD (sporting world inc) ever in terms of fame and prestige is Rocky's

T-K-O

walshb wrote: »

I'm not with you?

My point is that Rocky's record is unique in the sense that it belongs
to the Heavyweight division. It is ONLY open to the heavyweight champion of the world.

Joe's record can go to 100-0; it's still a separate record. It's
a record in the lower weight divisions. That's the distinction
I wanted to make!

Rocky's record is the most famous ACROSS the whole
sporting world. It is that prestigious, as was the title of world heavyweight champion, back in the day!

It has ZERO to do with who is the best undefeated fighter. It's a record distinction I am
making; that's all!

Rocky's record eclipses Ali; but IMO, Ali is the greatest fighter ever.

The greatest RECORD (sporting world inc) ever in terms of fame and prestige is Rocky's

Yeah OK its the most famous record as it is the HW division But as boxing fans well know the division is shot. And if Joe was kicking ass beating the guys I said 10 years ago I would argue that would elevate him to Ali status.

walshb

T-K-O wrote: »

Yeah OK its the most famous record as it is the HW division But as boxing fans well know the division is shot. And if Joe was kicking ass beating the guys I said 10 years ago I would argue that would elevate him to Ali status.

Hey, lets frame this. We agree!

I'm glad you see where I am coming from. The reason boxing has for so
many years been so prestigious etc; is that the heavyweight champion of the world was seen by the sporting world as D tilte.

No man/woman could eclipse this title in any other sport, whether it be Wimbledon champ, worlds fastest man, Olympic champ etc etc.

You are right when you say it has so deteriorated. Not many even know who the champ is. But, in the day, the champ was the MAN across the whole sporting world.

The Tyson day was my living memory of its power and prestige. Nobody at that time eclipsed Tyson's fame and respect in the world of sport. Ali before him, Louis before him, Dempsey before him etc!

And though today it has waned and faded, the actual words still resonate.
World Heavyweight Champion! Beautiful!

Just those claiming it are not so beautiful

Hey, PBF coud come out now and win 20 more fights against class opposition.
"D" record still will always belong to the ROCK!

T-K-O

Yeah I hear ya, but the facts of the matter is the HW division, sadly is no more.

Joe having a career as I said before is a pipe dream as is PBF fighting a welterweight fighter.

cowzerp

T-K-O wrote: »

You boys will be shocked to hear I totally disagree. Calzaghes opponents prevent him from over taking Rocky.

If he somehow manage to beat Benn, defeat Eubank a year or so earlier add that to wins against B-Hop and Jones 6 or 7 years ago and it would be hard to argue against Clazaghe being the best undefeated fighter ever.

I totally agree with this, His only decent opponents that where peak where lacy and kessler, Lacy=big deal! and kessler=good not great.

he will be back and i hope he loses as the idea of calzaghe been talked of as better than leonard, Hearns, Ali even! because this record is a joke.

but in saying that, if technically i liked joe i could perhaps see past his lack of beating quality opposition, but as the saying goes you can only beat whats put in front of you.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

I totally agree with this, His only decent opponents that where peak where lacy and kessler, Lacy=big deal! and kessler=good not great.

he will be back and i hope he loses as the idea of calzaghe been talked of as better than leonard, Hearns, Ali even! because this record is a joke.

but in saying that, if technically i liked joe i could perhaps see past his lack of beating quality opposition, but as the saying goes you can only beat whats put in front of you.

Paul, you just hate Calzaghe; like I hate Dunne:rolleyes::D

Running Bing

T-K-O wrote: »

BS.

I was at the Jones fight but I do not give Joe that much credit for beating him. Joe's early career will always bring out the doubters.

Did you read my post?


The point Im making is in my eye's Jones was past it and I dont give JC that much credit for the victory either that wont be that relevant 30 years from now. If you think thats BS fine but argue that point.


Rocky's record is the most glittering either. Joe Louis and Jersey Joe are probably the most famous names in there and they had a combined age of 379 when Rocky fought them.

His best fights were the two with Ezzard Charles and thats what really seperates him from JC in my eyes....his hearts, guts, passion, tenacity and two of the greatest fights ever (not to say JC does have all those qualities we just never really seen them to the extent we did with Marciano).

The point I'm trying to make is Rocky is probably looked on now as a better boxer than he really was (and it pains me to say it because Im a massive rock fan).

Derek Zoolander

Babybing wrote: »

Did you read my post?


The point Im making is in my eye's Jones was past it and I dont give JC that much credit for the victory either that wont be that relevant 30 years from now. If you think thats BS fine but argue that point.


Rocky's record is the most glittering either. Joe Louis and Jersey Joe are probably the most famous names in there and they had a combined age of 379 when Rocky fought them.

His best fights were the two with Ezzard Charles and thats what really seperates him from JC in my eyes....his hearts, guts, passion, tenacity and two of the greatest fights ever (not to say JC does have all those qualities we just never really seen them to the extent we did with Marciano).

The point I'm trying to make is Rocky is probably looked on now as a better boxer than he really was (and it pains me to say it because Im a massive rock fan).

I thought that Apollo Creed and Clubber Lang defeated Rocky:D

walshb

Babybing wrote: »

Did you read my post?


The point Im making is in my eye's Jones was past it and I dont give JC that much credit for the victory either that wont be that relevant 30 years from now. If you think thats BS fine but argue that point.


Rocky's record is the most glittering either. Joe Louis and Jersey Joe are probably the most famous names in there and they had a combined age of 379 when Rocky fought them.

His best fights were the two with Ezzard Charles and thats what really seperates him from JC in my eyes....his hearts, guts, passion, tenacity and two of the greatest fights ever (not to say JC does have all those qualities we just never really seen them to the extent we did with Marciano).

The point I'm trying to make is Rocky is probably looked on now as a better boxer than he really was (and it pains me to say it because Im a massive rock fan).

The rock is a better boxer/fighter than he gets credit for. I have watched and studied him in many bouts and some of the things he could do were quite special. I think too many look for the slick and fast and stylish and all that and possibly ignore the more subtle skills a boxer/fighter possesses. This is the case with the Rock

redout

joepenguin wrote: »

He had a fantastic career, lets not forget it was Hopkins that pulled out of a fight with him a few years back when he was considered in his prime (look what he dd to pavlik months after calzaghe though) and Eubank was a dangerous replacement for Collins. etc.

Hold your horses brother. Was Pavlik not fighting out of his weight class in that fight. I even remember Hopkins saying to him in the ring after not to sweat it as he was fighting above his normal weight.

nacho libre

cowzerp wrote: »

I totally agree with this, His only decent opponents that where peak where lacy and kessler, Lacy=big deal! and kessler=good not great.
.

Kessler is a great fighter. many people were saying Calzaghe would lose to him.
i'd love if Kessler faced Hopkins because i'd fancy Kessler to beat Hopkins. of course if Hopkins were to lose the excuse would be age eventually caught up with him:)

walshb

nacho libre wrote: »

Kessler is a great fighter. many people were saying Calzaghe would lose to him.
i'd love if Kessler faced Hopkins because i'd fancy Kessler to beat Hopkins. of course if Hopkins were to lose the excuse would be age eventually caught up with him:)

Well, the only conceivable way a fighter of Kessler's ability would defeat Hopkins is because of age. There is no way he would beat a young Hopkins.
So, stating this is not an excuse; it's fact!

ODD-JOB

Big Ears wrote: »

He also faced the hardest opposition available at almost every turn, when he probably could of milked up fighting weak contenders.

For a minute there I thought you were talking about Calzaghe !! I was thinking that BIG-EARS has finally lost the plot ! lol

eagle eye

An unbeaten fighter retires and you guys have to attack him one last time.

What really annoys me is that he beat Hopkins and you all said he had no hope, and after he did it, BHop is over the hill, then BHop comes back and beats Pavlik who destroyed the man who beat BHop twice and it was a brilliant performance by BHop, and you all agreed, but here we are with Calzaghe retiring and now there are reasons why BHop could beat Pavlik but it does not apply to the Calzaghe win in any way. :rolleyes:

That is what I've read over the last while in this thread. Its absolutely silly, get a grip the lot of you.
Everytime a Calzaghe thread has opened you see the same couple of anti Joe guys attempting to make their case.
I don't have any interest in getting involved in this, I've said my bit about Joe earlier and I'll leave it at that.
Just read over the thread and then read over what you've said in the aftermath of the BHop/Pavlik fight.

Jeebus you have even one guy stating that he will be back. Lol, I listened to his interview and unlike others he did say 'you can never say never', so he realises what others before him have not, but thats the sign of a guy who will never get back in the ring.

cowzerp

eagle eye wrote: »

What really annoys me is that he beat Hopkins and you all said he had no hope, and after he did it, BHop is over the hill, then BHop comes back and beats Pavlik who destroyed the man who beat BHop twice and it was a brilliant performance by BHop, and you all agreed, but here we are with Calzaghe retiring and now there are reasons why BHop could beat Pavlik but it does not apply to the Calzaghe win in any way. :rolleyes:


Jeebus you have even one guy stating that he will be back. Lol, .

He will be back, he is looking to get a massive offer to return, obviously if he's retired the promoter will have to offer him more than normal to supposedly entice him back to a full house in the millenium stadium!

also there is no getting over the fact that hopkins fought differently in both fights and beat calzaghe in a lot of peoples minds anyway!

and Hopkins is old, that cant be changed, if he is beaten that will always be a valid reason as to why, all he proved is he can still turn it on sometimes, plus pavlik was designed for a fighter like hopkins. fighter a beating fighter b does not make him better than fighter c!

People dont have to like Calzaghe, i know you cant understand why people may not, but i dont understand how people do so its horses for courses, his record is not great on paper and his technical abilities are poor,

the only fight that i actually though he used good technique in was the kessler one and i was shocked as it was the 1st time he looked like a trained boxer!

walshb

eagle eye wrote: »

An unbeaten fighter retires and you guys have to attack him one last time.

What really annoys me is that he beat Hopkins and you all said he had no hope, and after he did it, BHop is over the hill, then BHop comes back and beats Pavlik who destroyed the man who beat BHop twice and it was a brilliant performance by BHop, and you all agreed, but here we are with Calzaghe retiring and now there are reasons why BHop could beat Pavlik but it does not apply to the Calzaghe win in any way. :rolleyes:

That is what I've read over the last while in this thread. Its absolutely silly, get a grip the lot of you.
Everytime a Calzaghe thread has opened you see the same couple of anti Joe guys attempting to make their case.
I don't have any interest in getting involved in this, I've said my bit about Joe earlier and I'll leave it at that.
Just read over the thread and then read over what you've said in the aftermath of the BHop/Pavlik fight.

Jeebus you have even one guy stating that he will be back. Lol, I listened to his interview and unlike others he did say 'you can never say never', so he realises what others before him have not, but thats the sign of a guy who will never get back in the ring.

Ok, no need to start cryin' mate!:D

d22ontour

Babybing wrote: »

46-0, two weight world champion who beat Roy Jones Junior and Bernard Hopkins:eek::eek::eek:

Nobody will care in 30 years time that they were both past their best and a large number of those 46 wins came against nobodies.

Yes that will endear him to a be a boxing legend ????

All/every boxing legend fought everyone at their peaks to achieve legend status.Do you think fighting 30/35 easy fights and fighting 2 decent fighters past their best entitles you to legend status ?

Legends are legends in how they boxed but most importantly who they fought and at what level they fought at.

Hype will always work against any British boxer seeing as most are not up to task to fight consistant high lvl opponents as history shows us.

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

He will be back, he is looking to get a massive offer to return, obviously if he's retired the promoter will have to offer him more than normal to supposedly entice him back to a full house in the millenium stadium!

I lol again, Joe Calzaghe is one of the most sought after fighters out there right now, he does not need to retire to get a big pay day or 'more than normal'.
And he did say 'never say never' in his interview but it was more of a point that he won't say it just in case it ever did happen. He explained it clearly in the interview that he feels he has achieved everything he set out to.

And he was ducked, not the other way around by the big names so you can't stick that on him either. They did not want to know about him.

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

Well, the only conceivable way a fighter of Kessler's ability would defeat Hopkins is because of age. There is no way he would beat a young Hopkins.
So, stating this is not an excuse; it's fact!

of course it's an excuse because age wasn't an issue when he beat Pavlik, yet it's cited when he loses to an opponent like Calzaghe;)

cowzerp

eagle eye wrote: »

I lol again, Joe Calzaghe is one of the most sought after fighters out there right now, he does not need to retire to get a big pay day or 'more than normal'.
And he did say 'never say never' in his interview but it was more of a point that he won't say it just in case it ever did happen. He explained it clearly in the interview that he feels he has achieved everything he set out to.

And he was ducked, not the other way around by the big names so you can't stick that on him either. They did not want to know about him.

If you believe any of that you need to stop dreaming!

he also said he wanted to finish with a big fight in cardiff!
he may not of ducked people but his management steered him up a safe path-this is obvious, if you dont accept that then there is little point debating with you as your wearing calzaghe tinted glasses.

The man is unproven and will probably retire that way, and his legacy will be forever the man who fought no one at there peak, i think he'll have 2 more fights against names that are easy pickings, then retire.

joepenguin

redout wrote: »

Hold your horses brother. Was Pavlik not fighting out of his weight class in that fight. I even remember Hopkins saying to him in the ring after not to sweat it as he was fighting above his normal weight.

He was indeed. Hopkins wasnt the biggets of light heavies anyway and never fought any monsters at the weight. In fact apart from Tarver who had to lose a whole load of weight to fight Hopkins due to the rocky movie, Hopkins only fought guys coming up in weight: Winky, who could make light middle(and was champ of that division at a point with 2 wins over Mosely), Pavlik who was undefeated world champ at middle, and Calzaghe who was undefeated world champ at super middle. Hopkins even fought smaller guys at middle to help cement his legacy:DLH, Tito.

Pavlik fought a little out of his weight class when it suite Taylor at 166 or 168, so it was a good taster for him. Styles do make fights and I believe Calzaghes style gave him far more problems than Pavliks.

Hopkins was very supporting after saying not to let that fight ruin him, because it could and I hope he takes his advice and gets on with things. Fct remains that Hopkins can still hang with the best of them and Calzghae edged it on 2 of the 3 scorecards and while I dont believe Hopkins was robbed, a very strong case can be made to say Hopkins won the fight.

Pavlik came up 10 pounds to fight Hopkins. Calzaghe came up 8.5 (even though both made 173 so it was only a 5lb in the difference compared to his normal opponent)

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

If you believe any of that you need to stop dreaming!

he also said he wanted to finish with a big fight in cardiff!
he may not of ducked people but his management steered him up a safe path-this is obvious, if you dont accept that then there is little point debating with you as your wearing calzaghe tinted glasses.

The man is unproven and will probably retire that way, and his legacy will be forever the man who fought no one at there peak, i think he'll have 2 more fights against names that are easy pickings, then retire.

What comes across in all your posts is an incredible dislike maybe even hate for Joe Calzaghe so I'm not going any further with this.
I don't wear tinted glasses ever when judging a fighter.

walshb

My main gripe with Joe was his lack of power and his punch technique.
Other than that; he was a superb fighter who did amazing
things in the ring and some will never give him his
credit. Hey, Joe did what he had to and always found a way to
win; for some, this still isn't enough.

He isn't perfect; but what fighter is. Yes, he met faded Chris; but was that
his fault? No; he was young remember and Chris was still very decent.

He never met Benn; again, so what, not his fault.

He didn't meet Jones or Toney AT 168. They didn't meet him either and while I think Joe does lose to Toney, he has a shot at Jones and in both bouts he will be hell fo 12 rds. His footwork, speed, conditioning and commitment are so so commendable.

He met the supposed monster Lacy, who I do not rate; but the yanks
were rating him. Joe demolished him and I cannot diss this win one bit; even if I think Lacy is overrated, Joe still destroyed him

I know Paul does not like Joe's technique or style very much; but I am sure Paul respects Joe's legacy, commitment and record. Paul; he met some very fine men and didn't meet some fine others; but that is all ifs and buts and excuses.

I have changed my view a lot about Cal. I really do admire his achievements and do believe he is a great great fighter!

Pride Fighter

I wish him well in his retirement, he was a true champion.

walshb

"Nobody is arguing what Calzaghe has done is not an achievement, people are arguing over how much of an acheivement it actually is."

I came across this written on the BBC discussions page regarding Joe and his legacy. I agree 100 percent. I happen to think the achievement is top class and had he met and bet some others it would have been even better; but what was he to do. He can't do everything and it was not all on his
side that the fights didn't materialise.

You know, the same could be said about Jones; "well, he never beat Cal."

megadodge

He isn't perfect; but what fighter is. Yes, he met faded Chris; but was that
his fault? No; he was young remember and Chris was still very decent.

He never met Benn; again, so what, not his fault.

He didn't meet Jones or Toney AT 168. They didn't meet him either and while I think Joe does lose to Toney, he has a shot at Jones and in both bouts he will be hell fo 12 rds. His footwork, speed, conditioning and commitment are so so commendable.

Eubank was still good enough to give the MUCH bigger Carl Thompson two absolute wars for the CRUISERWEIGHT title the following year. He certainly didn't look faded in either of those fights.

Benn was retired before Joe even won the title. And anyway I think Calzaghe would have handled Benn quite handily, too fast, too clever and too tough.

Toney hadn't fought at super-middle since 1994 !! Considering Joe didn't win the title until 1997, well... And I think Joe is an absolute nightmare stylistically for Toney. He's exactly the type of fighter Toney had major problems with - faster than him, much better footwork and most of all miles busier. I can't see anything other than a Calzaghe UD if they had met.

Jones was up at light-heavy a year before Joe won the title. But I don't see Calzaghe beating him though. For once Joe'd be meeting someone faster than him and equally as well conditioned. Jones is also more powerful, better feet and just all-round too skilful. I think Jones wins a clear but not easy UD.

So who does that leave ?

Sven Ottke, whose people wanted absolutely nothing to do with Calzaghe and made it pretty clear.

Bernard Hopkins, who Big Ears on this forum has shown wanted nothing to do with him either when he was middle champ.

After that, I can't really think of anyone but I'm sure there are some nobodies out there who will be suddenly be elevated to 'top class' simply cos it suits the argument of those who don't like Calzaghe.