Calzaghe

I've been a fan of his for years. At this weight, he didn't seem to me as
the Joe I know.

If you've posted "is THIS the great joe C?", then you need to youtube his
fight with Jeff Left Hook Lacy.

That is the real Joe Calzaghe

"James" <I_h8_spam@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:uYROj.53149$dA2.30645@read2.cgocable.net...
> I've been a fan of his for years. At this weight, he didn't seem to me as
> the Joe I know.
>
> If you've posted "is THIS the great joe C?", then you need to youtube his
> fight with Jeff Left Hook Lacy.
>
> That is the real Joe Calzaghe

The "real" Joe Calzaghe fought last night. The difference between the man
who fought Lacy and the fighter we saw last night would be attributed to
whom he fought. Lacy is a virtual amateur when you compare his technical
abilities to those of Bernard Hopkins. A fighter such as Hopkins will make
the best fighter either look 'not too great' or a good fighter 'darn right
bad'. Last night Calzaghe appeared "not too great".

Same fighter, different opponents.

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:52:14 -0600, The Sanity Cruzer wrote
(in article <JvKdnX5_es23bpbVnZ2dnUVZ_oimnZ2d@comcast.com>):

> The "real" Joe Calzaghe fought last night. The difference between the man
> who fought Lacy and the fighter we saw last night would be attributed to
> whom he fought. Lacy is a virtual amateur when you compare his technical
> abilities to those of Bernard Hopkins. A fighter such as Hopkins will make
> the best fighter either look 'not too great' or a good fighter 'darn right
> bad'. Last night Calzaghe appeared "not too great".
>
> Same fighter, different opponents.


Nice way of putting it TC and I'm still a little shocked over it all as I
expected more from both last night. I thought Bernard was on key with that
first round action but he just seemed to slow off later on and well, that's
the way it goes. At 43 he's probably made enough money to not be worried
about it all so is it worth the trouble to carry on?




--
Cheers!

Dennis

Remove 'Elle-Kabong' to reply

"Ruddell" <ruddell'Elle-Kabong'@canada.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C43171F800032EE0B01AD9AF@news.sasktel. net...

> Nice way of putting it TC and I'm still a little shocked over it all as I
> expected more from both last night. I thought Bernard was on key with
> that
> first round action but he just seemed to slow off later on and well,
> that's
> the way it goes. At 43 he's probably made enough money to not be worried
> about it all so is it worth the trouble to carry on?

> Cheers!
>
> Dennis

I hope Hopkins takes a little of that money and goes out and learns to read,
so he can see what boxing fans really thought of his performance last night.
You know; the ones that he said knew that he really won the fight.

"Ruddell" <ruddell'Elle-Kabong'@canada.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C43171F800032EE0B01AD9AF@news.sasktel. net...
> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:52:14 -0600, The Sanity Cruzer wrote
> (in article <JvKdnX5_es23bpbVnZ2dnUVZ_oimnZ2d@comcast.com>):
>
>> The "real" Joe Calzaghe fought last night. The difference between the
>> man
>> who fought Lacy and the fighter we saw last night would be attributed to
>> whom he fought. Lacy is a virtual amateur when you compare his technical
>> abilities to those of Bernard Hopkins. A fighter such as Hopkins will
>> make
>> the best fighter either look 'not too great' or a good fighter 'darn
>> right
>> bad'. Last night Calzaghe appeared "not too great".
>>
>> Same fighter, different opponents.
>
>
> Nice way of putting it TC and I'm still a little shocked over it all as I
> expected more from both last night. I thought Bernard was on key with
> that
> first round action but he just seemed to slow off later on and well,
> that's
> the way it goes. At 43 he's probably made enough money to not be worried
> about it all so is it worth the trouble to carry on?

No, at 43 the body does not do what the mind wants it to do relative to what
it was able to accomplish when it was 'just' 30. It's the old story of the
mind being willing and the body unable.

"The Sanity Cruzer" <sanitycruzer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:JvKdnX5_es23bpbVnZ2dnUVZ_oimnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> "James" <I_h8_spam@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:uYROj.53149$dA2.30645@read2.cgocable.net...
>> I've been a fan of his for years. At this weight, he didn't seem to me as
>> the Joe I know.
>>
>> If you've posted "is THIS the great joe C?", then you need to youtube his
>> fight with Jeff Left Hook Lacy.
>>
>> That is the real Joe Calzaghe
>
> The "real" Joe Calzaghe fought last night. The difference between the man
> who fought Lacy and the fighter we saw last night would be attributed to
> whom he fought. Lacy is a virtual amateur when you compare his technical
> abilities to those of Bernard Hopkins. A fighter such as Hopkins will
> make the best fighter either look 'not too great' or a good fighter 'darn
> right bad'. Last night Calzaghe appeared "not too great".
>
> Same fighter, different opponents.

Exactly.
I don't see why anyone would be dissapointed with Calzaghe's performance.
Hopkins is tricky and clever, and Calzaghe did really well to deal with it
all.

Mr.Will

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:19:22 -0400, "James" <I_h8_spam@yahoo.ca>
wrote:

>I've been a fan of his for years. At this weight, he didn't seem to me as
>the Joe I know.
>
>If you've posted "is THIS the great joe C?", then you need to youtube his
>fight with Jeff Left Hook Lacy.
>
>That is the real Joe Calzaghe
>
slappy joe has no future in the division predict he will drop down and
fight middleweight pavlik --- and lose

"Mr.Will" <info@mr-will.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MsZOj.66929$kN5.48356@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
>> Same fighter, different opponents.
>
> Exactly.
> I don't see why anyone would be dissapointed with Calzaghe's performance.
> Hopkins is tricky and clever, and Calzaghe did really well to deal with it
> all.
>
> Mr.Will

Agree with that 100%. After dealing with the uniqueness of Hopkins
'tactics', he still won pretty convincingly.

"Izheet Madroors" <I_Zheet_Madroors@thedesertouthouse.com> wrote in message
news:09GdnQWnFJbXBpHVnZ2dnUVZ_rGhnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>
> "Mr.Will" <info@mr-will.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:MsZOj.66929$kN5.48356@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
>>> Same fighter, different opponents.
>>
>> Exactly.
>> I don't see why anyone would be dissapointed with Calzaghe's performance.
>> Hopkins is tricky and clever, and Calzaghe did really well to deal with
>> it all.
>>
>> Mr.Will
>
> Agree with that 100%. After dealing with the uniqueness of Hopkins
> 'tactics', he still won pretty convincingly.

Not on my card, but it was hardly like "robbery".

Mr.Will

On Apr 20, 9:52*pm, "The Sanity Cruzer" <sanitycru...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> "James" <I_h8_s...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:uYROj.53149$dA2.30645@read2.cgocable.net...
>
> > I've been a fan of his for years. At this weight, he didn't seem to me as
> > the Joe I know.
>
> > If you've posted "is THIS the great joe C?", then you need to youtube his
> > fight with Jeff Left Hook Lacy.
>
> > That is the real Joe Calzaghe
>
> The "real" Joe Calzaghe fought last night. *The difference between the man
> who fought Lacy and the fighter we saw last night would be attributed to
> whom he fought. *Lacy is a virtual amateur when you compare his technical
> abilities to those of Bernard Hopkins. *A fighter such as Hopkins will make
> the best fighter either look 'not too great' or a good fighter 'darn right
> bad'. *Last night Calzaghe appeared "not too great".
>
> Same fighter, different opponents.

Yes, but no one looks great against BHop. Not even as fine a boxer as
Winky Wright. Tarver also looked bad against him. Calzaghe looked
way better than either of those two did. Give him credit for that.

If BHop tried to "walk him down" like Roach said he should do, he
would have gotten he ears boxed off, which is what began to happen as
the fight progressed. Very few punches even thrown by BHop after the
4th round. Agressive fighters are outboxed by Joe. Joe would figure
out a way to win on points against Pavlik, I think. But you never
know.