Joe Calzaghe Comeback?

mr.mayo

Reports about a Joe Calzaghe return to boxing have been all over the web recently, supposedly his actual comeback fight will be a rematch with Bernard Hopkins. I have to admit that the first time I watched their fight, I thought Hopkins should have been awarded the decision, but since then I've looked back at the fight a few times and I've came to the conclusion that Joe probably done enough to get the win. Hopkins was on course for the win but he gassed big time and resorted to holding far too often. Joe meanwhile kept a high workrate, he was consistently throwing and landing shots.
After watching Hopkins' recent fights, I'd be willing to put almost any money on Joe winning this one too. Bernard has obviously suffered from serious decline, everyone knows that. Calzaghe however is more of an unknown quantity, since walking away last year we haven't seen him anywhere near a boxing ring, he does seem to have kept active though, enjoying a lively nightlife;) and even a stint on Strictly Come Dancing! Presuming Joe can make it back to even 75% of his former self, I have him winning this one pretty handily, I wouldn't expect it being anywhere near as close as last time.
I read an interview with Enzo recently, he talked about Joe wanting to match Rocky Marciano's perfect 49-0. Just for arguments sake, let's presume that Joe beats Hopkins and goes after Marciano's record - Who would you like to see him fight? Would he still be able to compete with the Dawson's, Bute's etc of this world?
Finally and most importantly - Do you want him to return to boxing?

Vintagekits

he loves that duck egg too much I think.

Feargal as Luimneach

Come back and fight Froch. Serious grudge match!

dlofnep

Nah, he's had a good career. Has made his money. He should stay retired, stay healthy and live a long life.

seadnamac

Love Joe. One of my favourite fighters. I thought it was refreshing to see him retire at what seemed like an appropriate time rather than hanging around until he was past his best.

That being said, if he was to come back and fight an Andre Ward or a Chad Dawson, it would definitely get me excited and would be a great chance for him to test himself against their youth and stamina. He could improve his all time credintials a lot if he was to come back and beat one of those guys.

I have zero interest in seeing fight Hopkins again and I think he would blow the likes of Froch and Bute away. On points of course.

Showtime should be throwing the kitchen sink to try and get him to commit to fighting the Super Six winner in my opinion, that would be huge fight and spark even more interest in the tournament.

nacho libre

As great as the itch to get back into a familiar routine seems to be, i'd say it'll torment him if he gets back in the game and then loses in pursuit of Marciano's record - which he likely will do if he takes on Dawson and Ward. There is absolutely no point coming back to face Hopkins either, as he'll be beating a fighter whose age has finally caught with him.
He should listen to his father and stay retired.

joepenguin

I voted no.

If he were to come back and equal /surpass Marcianos record then I would like to see him fight Froch, Pavlik, and someone like Winky, Mayorga, Taylor. That would see him equal or surpass the record. Most of those make for good fights and would have a high profile. I dont see the point in him fighting a Dawson or Bute as Joe was fading a little towards the end of his career, not by much, but he got out at the perfect time. Thats why I would like to see him in with the above as he would be rusty and not as good as he was even towards the end.

Although it wouldnt be a fight to excite the casual fan I think Joe vs winky would be a class fight. Froch would be the ultimate grudge match, I see him beat pavlik fairly handy and he is still a big name. Mayorga, is well... just mayorga, and as for Taylor well I dont know if i want to see him in action any time soon but if he gets back anywhere near 100% then why not.

In order of preference:

Froch
Pavlik
Winky
Mayorga
Taylor

But Froch would have to be opponent number 3 to add to the occasion.
Think Winky to make it 47, Pavlik to make it 48, and a huge all british showdown with froch to make it 49. Sign off with a victory over Taylor or someone like that.

Having said all that I think he should stay retired and even though I wasnt a fan of his style etc. You have to admire what he achieved and he was the man in his division for a long long time.

seadnamac

joepenguin wrote: »

I voted no.

If he were to come back and equal /surpass Marcianos record then I would like to see him fight Froch, Pavlik, and someone like Winky, Mayorga, Taylor. That would see him equal or surpass the record. Most of those make for good fights and would have a high profile. I dont see the point in him fighting a Dawson or Bute as Joe was fading a little towards the end of his career, not by much, but he got out at the perfect time. Thats why I would like to see him in with the above as he would be rusty and not as good as he was even towards the end.

Although it wouldnt be a fight to excite the casual fan I think Joe vs winky would be a class fight. Froch would be the ultimate grudge match, I see him beat pavlik fairly handy and he is still a big name. Mayorga, is well... just mayorga, and as for Taylor well I dont know if i want to see him in action any time soon but if he gets back anywhere near 100% then why not.

In order of preference:

Froch
Pavlik
Winky
Mayorga
Taylor

But Froch would have to be opponent number 3 to add to the occasion.
Think Winky to make it 47, Pavlik to make it 48, and a huge all british showdown with froch to make it 49. Sign off with a victory over Taylor or someone like that.

Having said all that I think he should stay retired and even though I wasnt a fan of his style etc. You have to admire what he achieved and he was the man in his division for a long long time.

I agree on the Pavlik fight, that one slipped my mind, that's one I would like to see.

I would tend to disagree on the rest though. Winky, Mayorga and Taylor are all finished as far as I'm concerned. Mayorga even fancies himself as an MMA fighter now. Taylor needs to stop boxing. I know you are mentioning these because you think Joe has slipped and this would be his level, but I couldn't see any of those fights being competitive at all.

Calzaghe isn't that old at 38, old but not over the hill, and hasn't had the kind of career that has been full of wars and slug fests. He should still be fairly mentally sharp in the ring and hopefully retain a lot of the handspeed.

A fight with Froch would be entertaining at least but the only way Froch would win is if Joe has lost all the handspeed and sharpness and that would be a shame. A Calzaghe in peak condition would bamboozle Froch.

I think he would still give the likes of Dawson or Ward a great fight, and might just favour him in either of those.

joepenguin

seadnamac wrote: »

I agree on the Pavlik fight, that one slipped my mind, that's one I would like to see.

I would tend to disagree on the rest though. Winky, Mayorga and Taylor are all finished as far as I'm concerned. Mayorga even fancies himself as an MMA fighter now. Taylor needs to stop boxing. I know you are mentioning these because you think Joe has slipped and this would be his level, but I couldn't see any of those fights being competitive at all.

Calzaghe isn't that old at 38, old but not over the hill, and hasn't had the kind of career that has been full of wars and slug fests. He should still be fairly mentally sharp in the ring and hopefully retain a lot of the handspeed.

A fight with Froch would be entertaining at least but the only way Froch would win is if Joe has lost all the handspeed and sharpness and that would be a shame. A Calzaghe in peak condition would bamboozle Froch.

I think he would still give the likes of Dawson or Ward a great fight, and might just favour him in either of those.

A prime Calzaghe beats all of these guys but the version at the tail end i dunno, much less a returning Calzaghe. I chose those guys based on his ability to beat them, looking good doing so and drawing a bit of a crowd. I think he can be competitve with anyone at 168 or 175 now but thats what doesnt fit.... Competitive. He'd hardly risk that 0 againt Dawson or Bute would he? Ok maybe Taylor and Mayorga is taking things too far but i didnt give it much thought, maybe Miranda or someone?

Other than money i see no reason for him to come back. For me his career is over and if he did break 49-0 then fair play, but it would take him 18 months at the very least to do so. Would it be for legacy? If so then a fight with Dawson is the only one that makes sense. In which case I would like to see him face Pavlik, Froch and Dawson in that order. Could a 40 year old Calzaghe beat a prime Dawson?

The Sparrow

I don't want to see Joe come back. He acheived everything in boxing and his record speaks for itself. Marciano's record is all well and good but is it really worth jeopardising your health and unbeaten record for?

Having said that, I would dearly love to see Joe shut Froch up. I don't think Froch could hang with Calzaghe if Joe was anywhere near his peak.

seadnamac

joepenguin wrote: »

A prime Calzaghe beats all of these guys but the version at the tail end i dunno, much less a returning Calzaghe. I chose those guys based on his ability to beat them, looking good doing so and drawing a bit of a crowd. I think he can be competitve with anyone at 168 or 175 now but thats what doesnt fit.... Competitive. He'd hardly risk that 0 againt Dawson or Bute would he? Ok maybe Taylor and Mayorga is taking things too far but i didnt give it much thought, maybe Miranda or someone?

Other than money i see no reason for him to come back. For me his career is over and if he did break 49-0 then fair play, but it would take him 18 months at the very least to do so. Would it be for legacy? If so then a fight with Dawson is the only one that makes sense. In which case I would like to see him face Pavlik, Froch and Dawson in that order. Could a 40 year old Calzaghe beat a prime Dawson?

I suppose that's the crux of the matter really, does he want to come back purely to get to 49 or 50 and 0 or does he want to improve his legacy and prove he's still the best, like he was for all those years?

If it's the former than some of the fights you mentioned would be the way to go, but that would be shame for me and I would also prefer if he just stayed retired.

But if it's the latter for the legacy, then I would be very interested to see how a fight between him and Dawson would go. There's also the argument that, altough I like him, with Dawsons best wins coming against Tarver and Johnson, he could still be said to be somewhat untested at the top level.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what his motivation is.

eagle eye

Big Calzaghe fan and I am of the same opinion. He walked away after a great career, leave the gloves hung up now Joe.

Spazdarn

If you could guarantee he'd come back at the same level he left I'd be excited to see him, but a year + out of the game doesn't inspire confidence.

The Recliner

I was delighted when Joe retired

I wanted him to retire undefeated, I think it is a great achievement and I would hate to see him comeback and risk it

He made the right decision and he should stick with it

Spazdarn

His undefeated streak is slightly tarnished by the competition he faced to achieve it...

cowzerp

joepenguin wrote: »

If he were to come back and equal /surpass Marcianos record then I would like to see him fight Froch, Pavlik, and someone like Winky, Mayorga, Taylor. That would see him equal or surpass the record..

if he comes back he might aswell continue in his usual manner of fighting fighters that are finished or just not that great at all, he wont fight Dawson as he will be scared he'll lose and same applies to Bute.

Not a fan but retiring with his unbeaten record will go down in history and if he does come back and lose he will regret it, personally a loss or 3 would suit his record but from a non biased point of view he should stay retired as he has his legacy which is well beyond his true ability already.

nacho libre

seadnamac wrote: »

I suppose that's the crux of the matter really, does he want to come back purely to get to 49 or 50 and 0 or does he want to improve his legacy and prove he's still the best, like he was for all those years?

If it's the former than some of the fights you mentioned would be the way to go, but that would be shame for me and I would also prefer if he just stayed retired.

But if it's the latter for the legacy, then I would be very interested to see how a fight between him and Dawson would go. There's also the argument that, altough I like him, with Dawsons best wins coming against Tarver and Johnson, he could still be said to be somewhat untested at the top level.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what his motivation is.

Whatever the motivation is it's a mistake. He is not as good as he was, and if you accept his critics argument(which i don't) that his record is tainted, then it only increases the risk of him losing against top-level fighters.
As i said earlier he may miss the routine and spotlight, but that will be far outweighed by a feeling of bitter regret if he comes back and loses. He should just content himself with going down in history as being undefeated.

seadnamac

nacho libre wrote: »

Whatever the motivation is it's a mistake. He is not as good as he was, and if you accept his critics argument(which i don't) that his record is tainted, then it only increases the risk of him losing against top-level fighters.
As i said earlier he may miss the routine and spotlight, but that will be far outweighed by a feeling of bitter regret if he comes back and loses. He should just content himself with going down in history as being undefeated.

Me neither.

walshb

IF Joe comes back it certainly shouldn't be against the likes of Froch, Dirrell, Dawson, Abraham, Ward etc. Joe would be too old, too faded and a few years of living a less than ideal lifestyle. At prime he beats all these boys, but aged 38 or so and after such a layoff? No chance IMO....

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

if he comes back he might aswell continue in his usual manner of fighting fighters that are finished or just not that great at all, he wont fight Dawson as he will be scared he'll lose and same applies to Bute.

You mean like Hopkins who beat Winky Wright just before and Kelly Pavlik just after he lost to Calzaghe, or Kessler who beat Froch a couple of weeks ago, or Lacy who was unbeaten and rated the best out there when he fought him?

cowzerp

eagle eye wrote: »

You mean like Hopkins who beat Winky Wright just before and Kelly Pavlik just after he lost to Calzaghe, or Kessler who beat Froch a couple of weeks ago, or Lacy who was unbeaten and rated the best out there when he fought him?

Hopkins many feel won the fight with Calzaghe so moot point and to add to that he did not even fight good that night.

Kelly Pavlik was dire on the day he fought Hopkins, and Hopkins fought a much better fight that night than he did against Calzaghe.

Kessler has come on a lot since the fight with Calzaghe, i actually credit the Kessler win as a decent win on joe's record and thought joe fought well that night technically which was usually my main gripe with him

Lacy-Grow up man, he was and is a handbag built up by beating even worse handbags.

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

Hopkins many feel won the fight with Calzaghe so moot point and to add to that he did not even fight good that night.

Kelly Pavlik was dire on the day he fought Hopkins, and Hopkins fought a much better fight that night than he did against Calzaghe.

Kessler has come on a lot since the fight with Calzaghe, i actually credit the Kessler win as a decent win on joe's record and thought joe fought well that night technically which was usually my main gripe with him

Lacy-Grow up man, he was and is a handbag built up by beating even worse handbags.

Calzaghe beat Hopkins whether you like it or not that was the result.

So what you are saying is that previous form or form after they fought Calzhaghe doesn't matter except for Jeff Lacy's form because he was proven to be a lot worse than expected but he was unbeaten before he faced Calzaghe and he was made favourite for the fight but that means nothing to you.

I can take from this then that no matter who Calzaghe ever fought in his career it would not matter to you as you would still trash the guy. You just have excuses everywhere for everyone that ever fought Calzaghe unless they were bad fighters.

Get real.

cowzerp

eagle eye wrote: »

So what you are saying is that previous form or form after they fought Calzhaghe doesn't matter except for Jeff Lacy's form because he was proven to be a lot worse than expected but he was unbeaten before he faced Calzaghe and he was made favourite for the fight but that means nothing to you.

I can take from this then that no matter who Calzaghe ever fought in his career it would not matter to you as you would still trash the guy. You just have excuses everywhere for everyone that ever fought Calzaghe unless they were bad fighters.

Get real.

what i state is the way it is, Lacy was a nothing hyped up fight, Hopkins was old and fought old and lost controversially, Kessler is good not great and Calzaghe deserves kudos here, any other names he fought where finished, Eubank for example. Pavlik would have been a challenge but he chose to fight an old Hopkins instead even with his weight advantage over pavlik, he also could have fought Tarver or Bute but wanted no part of them.

Like it or not but thats how his carreer reads. only decent fighter he beat while not already gone was Kessler and he was probably 3-4 years off his prime and it was joe at his very best on that night.

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

what i state is the way it is, Lacy was a nothing hyped up fight, Hopkins was old and fought old and lost controversially, Kessler is good not great and Calzaghe deserves kudos here, any other names he fought where finished, Eubank for example. Pavlik would have been a challenge but he chose to fight an old Hopkins instead even with his weight advantage over pavlik, he also could have fought Tarver or Bute but wanted no part of them.

Like it or not but thats how his carreer reads. only decent fighter he beat while not already gone was Kessler and he was probably 3-4 years off his prime and it was joe at his very best on that night.

Ahahaha you are such a joke.

There you go again, you say he should have fought Pavlik but he beat the man that beat Pavlik afterwards but thats not good enough for you. And Hopkins beat Tarver too not long before he fought Calzaghe.
But you just want to call Hopkins old and suggest that he actually beat Calzaghe but still drum up Pavlik and Tarver as guys he should have fought.

Your post is just full of holes and you just want to throw out any half-assed argument that might throw doubt on Calzaghe's legacy.

cowzerp

eagle eye wrote: »

Ahahaha you are such a joke.

There you go again, you say he should have fought Pavlik but he beat the man that beat Pavlik afterwards but thats not good enough for you. And Hopkins beat Tarver too not long before he fought Calzaghe.
But you just want to call Hopkins old and suggest that he actually beat Calzaghe but still drum up Pavlik and Tarver as guys he should have fought.

Your post is just full of holes and you just want to throw out any half-assed argument that might throw doubt on Calzaghe's legacy.

Go and eat my bollox ya muppet, ya cant even have a proper debate without causing trouble, Hopkins was ****e v Calzaghe, he was super against Pavlik-if he fought that way v Calzaghe he would have easily won imo, Pavlik was made to beat Calzaghe too.

I suppose everyone who has beaten bredis prescott is better than Khan? well boxing does not work like that pal so cop on with your stupid excuses to make calzaghe sound better than he was.

I'm not interested in debating with you cause your a moron who makes these things personal because people dont agree with you.

Spazdarn

Joe Calzaghe is a class act, but he should have tested himself against the better fighters in America earlier in his career, if he had we probably wouldn't be having this conversation

eagle eye

cowzerp wrote: »

Go and eat my bollox ya muppet, ya cant even have a proper debate without causing trouble, Hopkins was ****e v Calzaghe, he was super against Pavlik-if he fought that way v Calzaghe he would have easily won imo, Pavlik was made to beat Calzaghe too.

I suppose everyone who has beaten bredis prescott is better than Khan? well boxing does not work like that pal so cop on with your stupid excuses to make calzaghe sound better than he was.

I'm not interested in debating with you cause your a moron who makes these things personal because people dont agree with you.

You see theres the unnatural hate coming out now.

Clearly Calzaghe blunted Hopkins and made him look bad. Better boxers generally do that to their opponents.

eagle eye

ToiletFusion wrote: »

Joe Calzaghe is a class act, but he should have tested himself against the better fighters in America earlier in his career, if he had we probably wouldn't be having this conversation

He wanted to fight the best in his prime but they didn't want him. Its not his fault he didn't get a shot at them.

walshb

Fellas, calm it down please.

Hopkins lost to Joe fair and square in a horrible fight.
Hopkins could only box the way he could because of Joe's
style. He looked so much better vs. Pavlik, because
Pavlik isn't half as skilled as Joe.

Paul, I don't like Joe's punching technique one bit, but
other than that he has a lot going for him.

He beat who was there at the time and he would beat who is there now
if he was close to peak. Never really enjoyed watching Joe's fights, but
the guy was a real winner.

BTW, does anyone really belive that Kessler today is better than the version Joe beat?

walshb

ToiletFusion wrote: »

Joe Calzaghe is a class act, but he should have tested himself against the better fighters in America earlier in his career, if he had we probably wouldn't be having this conversation

Which better fighters?

Toney, Jones, Hopkins? No, Joe came to stardom in '97 and two of those guys
were above the 168 lb limit and heading towards heavyweight. Hopkins was content to fight less than great men at 160 lbs, a division below Calzaghe

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

BTW, does anyone really belive that Kessler today is better than the version Joe beat?

no if anything i think Kessler has declined slightly. The Kessler that fought Joe Calzaghe would have won by UD against Froch.
You're right about Pavlik, he looked bad against Hopkins not because he had off day but due to Hopkins exposing his limitations. Hopkins just gave him a boxing lesson in that fight. If Calzaghe had fought him the result would have been exactly the same.
I understand people not liking Calzaghe's punching style but the guy was a great fighter. That said i do believe Jones would have beaten if they both met in their prime. Still there's no shame in that as we all know Jones was in a different league at his best.

seadnamac

cowzerp wrote: »

Go and eat my bollox ya muppet, ya cant even have a proper debate without causing trouble, Hopkins was ****e v Calzaghe, he was super against Pavlik-if he fought that way v Calzaghe he would have easily won imo, Pavlik was made to beat Calzaghe too.

I suppose everyone who has beaten bredis prescott is better than Khan? well boxing does not work like that pal so cop on with your stupid excuses to make calzaghe sound better than he was.

I'm not interested in debating with you cause your a moron who makes these things personal because people dont agree with you.

You don't think that had anything to do with Calzaghe? FFS. And I would also agree that, if anything, Kessler has declined since he met Calzaghe. He would have boxed the head off Pavlik aswell.

cowzerp

seadnamac wrote: »

You don't think that had anything to do with Calzaghe? FFS. And I would also agree that, if anything, Kessler has declined since he met Calzaghe. He would have boxed the head off Pavlik aswell.

He fough 2 different fights, he say back doing feck all v Joe and attacked pavlik, maybe that was tactical but it was bad tactics,

Kessler in my opinion is not at peak yet, he has 1-2 years before we see how good he can be, his reputation may not be what it was but he can still fight the same, with experience he will be batter.

nacho libre

He had different tactics against Pavlik because he knew he had his measure. He knew if he fought the same way against Calzaghe the fight would have resulted in a ud victory for Calzaghe.

walshb

My eyes definitely sees Kessler today as not being the force he was when Joe beat him.

I for a long time never rated Joe, or didn't want to rate him, but when you look back at
his career and study what he did, how he did it etc, it's very hard to deny this man serious credit. A fantastic athlete and a real dedicated fighter. He was a great fighter, one of the best that Britain ever produced, and his record proves this. There were some very good names on his ledger.

colly10

The first Hopkins - Calzaghe fight was torture to watch, I certainly won't be making that mistake a second time round. I think there was holding every 15 seconds on average in that fight. What exactly is he going to achieve by fighting a guy he's already beaten who's even more shot than he was the first time, is he planning on stepping up to heavyweight to fight Mike Tyson to get that all important 49th win?
Wouldn't mind seeing him fight someone like Bute