Joe Calzaghe's record

There's heated debate on Calzaghe's career. He failed to make his American debut at the right time and he ignored the PPV money over in the States. Calzaghe fans will defend their man down to the wire but let's ignore what he should have done and instead focus on what he achieved as a super-middleweight champion.

Calzaghe’s career based on who he fought through the Ring magazine's officials annual ratings:

1998:

1.Frankie Liles
2.Joe Calzaghe
3.Richie Woodhall
4.Sven Ottke
5.Charles Brewer
6.Robin Reid
7.Thomas Tate
8.Vincenzo Nardiello
9.Andrej Shkalikov
10.Vinny Pazienza

Calzaghe fought twice in '98, against Branko Sobot & Juan Carlos Gimenez Ferreyra. Neither were in the top 10.

1999:

1.Sven Ottke
2.Joe Calzaghe
3.Byron Mitchell
4.Markus Beyer
5.Charles Brewer
6.Thomas Tate
7.Frankie Liles
8.Richie Woodhall
9.Robin Reid
10.Glenn Catley

In 1999, he boxed Robin Reid, the 9th rated contender who had just lost his championship. He then boxed Rick Thornberry who wasn't a ranked contender in the top 10.

2000:

1.Sven Ottke
2.Joe Calzaghe
3.Bruno Girard
4.Charles Brewer
5.Thomas Tate
6.Dave Hilton Jr.
7.Dingaan Thobela
8.Glenn Catley
9.Byron Mitchell
10.James Butler

In 2000, he boxed David Starie, Omar Sheika and Richie Woodhall. None of these guys were in the top 10.

2001:

1.Sven Ottke
2.Joe Calzaghe
3.Byron Mitchell
4.Antwun Echols
5.Charles Brewer
6.Thomas Tate
7.Eric Lucas
8.Mads Larsen
9.Manny Siaca
10.Markus Beyer

In 2001, he boxed Mario Veit & Will McIntyre. Neither were in the top 10.

2002:

1.Joe Calzaghe
2.Sven Ottke
3.Antwun Echols
4.Eric Lucas
5.Byron Mitchell
6.Charles Brewer
7.Mads Larsen
8.Manny Siaca
9.Anthony Mundine
10.Markus Beyer

In 2002, he boxed Charles Brewer, Miguel Angel Jimenez & Tocker Pudwill. Brewer was ranked 6th and the other two were nowhere to be seen.

2003:

1.Joe Calzaghe
2.Sven Ottke
3.Anthony Mundine
4.Antwun Echols
5.Danny Green
6.Byron Mitchell
7.Markus Beyer
8.Charles Brewer
9.Mads Larsen
10.Robin Reid

In 2003, he boxed once against Byron Mitchell. Mitchell was ranked 6th.

2004:

1.Joe Calzaghe
2.Mikkel Kessler
3.Anthony Mundine
4.Antwun Echols
5.Danny Green
6.Jeff Lacy
7.Mads Larsen
8.Robin Reid
9.Markus Beyer
10.Manny Siaca

In 2004, he boxed Mger Mkrtchyan & Kabary Salem. Neither were in the top 10.

2005:

1.Joe Calzaghe
2.Mikkel Kessler
3.Jeff Lacy
4.Markus Beyer
5.Anthony Mundine
6.Danny Green
7.Manny Siaca
8.Otis Grant
9.Robin Reid
10.Librado Andrade

In 2005, he boxed Mario Veit & Evans Ashira. Neither were in the top 10.

2006:

1.Mikkel Kessler
2.Anthony Mundine
3.Jeff Lacy
4.Markus Beyer
5.Librado Andrade
6.Lucian Bute
7.Carl Froch
8.Allan Green
9.Denis Inkin
10.Peter Manfredo Jr.

It was 2006 when he finally fought a top 5 rated contender in Lacy. He boxed Sakio Bika in his following fight who wasn't ranked in the top 10. Note: Calzaghe became the Ring champion between 2006 & 2007.

2007:

1.Mikkel Kessler
2.Anthony Mundine
3.Lucian Bute
4.Jeff Lacy
5.Librado Andrade
6.Carl Froch
7.Allan Green
8.Sakio Bika
9.Denis Inkin
10.Jean Pascal

In 2007, he boxed Peter Manfredo Jr (who wasn't in the top 10) and then unified against Mikkel Kessler. Kessler was the second top 5 rated boxer he fought – his last fight in his ten-year ‘reign’ as ‘the king of the super-middleweights’.

That's SIXTEEN fights against guys who weren't even in the top 10. This totals a period of FIVE years.

To Calzaghe's credit - and I say 'credit' loosely - he split-decisioned a 43-year-old Hopkins and then went against his own words and beat a shell of Jones Jr. I say credit loosely because I believe Hopkins actually won the fight. If you score the fight on how pro boxing should be scored, then (1) effective aggression, (2) clean punching, (3) ring generalship and (4) defence all go in Hop's favour IMHO.

But the SD over Hopkins aside, what do you make of Calzaghe's record based on these statistical facts?

So you were the linguist?

No idea how many time's I've seen this, but it's no more interesting since the first time.

This is Jews to me. So who's this Jon Calzaghe?

i found this on another forum, not a bad review to be fair!

You pinched it from the old 606?

Does the term 'you can't polish a turd' spring to anyone else's mind?

This article has done the rounds

You do know the massive flaw you've with this don't you?

It's only the end of year rankings and doesn't take into consideration where people were ranked when they fought Calzaghe rather where they were ranked after they fought him.

Does the term 'you can't polish a turd' spring to anyone else's mind?
....................................................

but you can roll it in glitter

I know what the massive flaw with this is-it's been done to death and no-one gives a toss any more.

Not at all, Ring magazine review the year's top-10 contenders and then rank them for a given year based on the fighter's achievements and performances. There's no way this makes a difference to a review of Calzaghe's career because most of his best wins came against guys who were coming back from defeats and then achieved nothing after losing to him. Flawless buddy.

Good try tho
Calzaghe fans normally question the credibility of the Ring magazine
Surprised me there son

Jimmythebullet wrote:Does the term 'you can't polish a turd' spring to anyone else's mind?
....................................................

but you can roll it in glitter

Cheers jimmy. I just had to explain to the Mrs what I was chuckling at like a simpleton!

hitmansam wrote:Not at all, Ring magazine review the year's top-10 contenders and then rank them for a given year based on the fighter's achievements and performances. There's no way this makes a difference to a review of Calzaghe's career because most of his best wins came against guys who were coming back from defeats and then achieved nothing after losing to him. Flawless buddy.

Don't be so naive, in losing to Calzaghe they aren't going to hold their previous position are they fool?
It's generally seen to be a better indicator as to how someone is ranked at the time they fought not after and again showing yourself to be ignorant of the truth.

But they were coming back from defeats anyway I.e brewer, Mitchell, Reid lol by your own admission your a big mc fan so I'll let u off son

Jc*

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan which is neither here nor there when you try using statistics that have no bearing on anything. You also conveniently ignore the context of any previous losses and the fact of the matter is most world title challengers will have had recent losses.

Nonsense. Cotto knocked out an undefeated Maussa in 2003. In 2005, Maussa was ranked the 6th best light-welter in the world. He beat N'dou in 2004 and he was ranked a top-10 contender from 2004 until 2008. In fact, N'dou was actually rated a top-5 contender in 2006. He knocked out Corley in 2005 and Corley was ranked in the top-10 in 2005 and 2006. He knocked out Torres in 2005 and Torres was rated a top-10 contender in 06, 07 and 08. He beat up Malignaggi in 2006 and Paulie was considered the 2nd best light-welter in 2007 and was also ranked as a top-5 contender in 2008. He knocked out Quintana in 2006 and Quintana was ranked as a top-10 welterweight in 2008. In 07 when he beat Urkal, Urkal was a top-10 welterweight. He knocked out Judah in 2007 and Judah was ranked as a top-10 welter in both 07 and 08. In 07 he beat Mosley who was considered the 3rd best welter. Mosley continued to become the no.1 man at the weight. In 2008 he fought Margarito who was considered the no.1 contender in the welterweight division. Then Clottey, another top-10 Ring ranked welter at the time. Now that's what you call a proven track record. Listen and learn.

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

Post by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

I'm a huge fan of his and have him well inside my top ten all time brits but to say he dominated for 10 years is a false truth

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

Post by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan

Oh so you bring up Cotto yet again

Strange comment by me but fair enough, doesn't change the fact you seem to have a serious problem and seem incapable of talking about anything other than Calzaghe.

Oh very well done, trying to be all sarcastic with the use of quite frankly immature smileys

What difference does the fact i'm a Calzaghe fan make? It's not as if I spend my whole time posting the same old nonsense about a fighter is it.

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

Going to have trawl through and find the statistics for this, there was a thread on the old 606 which showed Calzaghe only face a few top ten ranked guys.

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan which is neither here nor there when you try using statistics that have no bearing on anything.

Sam,
Whilst you may believe you are winning this debate, and maybe you have a point, the manner you are doing it leaves a very sour taste in the mouth.

Grow up.

My point was that Calzaghe never dominated his division but go ahead take an isolated comment out of context and yet again immaturely put a smiley, you must have a fairly empty life if all you do is trawl through other posters comments.

My initial point still stands that its there current ranking that matters not their post fight rankings

Well it would do Bob
That old saying ... the truth hurts?
This isn't about winning or losing - not for me.
But I hate hypocrisy.
The proof is in the pudding.

The hypocrisy that opinions change all the time, well done you must be so proud of yourself

To be honest by opinion on Calzaghe changes from day to day but unlike you I focus more on debating things rather than point scoring over a lifeless imbecile.

Just to summarise imperialghosty's hypocrisy:

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

Post by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

I'm a huge fan of his and have him well inside my top ten all time brits but to say he dominated for 10 years is a false truth

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

Post by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

Going to have trawl through and find the statistics for this, there was a thread on the old 606 which showed Calzaghe only face a few top ten ranked guys.

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan which is neither here nor there when you try using statistics that have no bearing on anything.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**To be honest by opinion on Calzaghe changes from day to day but unlike you I focus more on debating things that point scoring over a lifeless imbecile.

I know we've established the fact - by your own admission - that you come out with strange comments but any chance you repost that one in English?

You really are one sad little person

Just to summarise imperialghosty's hypocrisy:

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

Post by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

I'm a huge fan of his and have him well inside my top ten all time brits but to say he dominated for 10 years is a false truth

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

Post by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

Going to have trawl through and find the statistics for this, there was a thread on the old 606 which showed Calzaghe only face a few top ten ranked guys.

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan which is neither here nor there when you try using statistics that have no bearing on anything.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Really showing yourself up here aren't you, like I said context

Peoples views on a certain person change from time to time depending on the circumstances. Me included.
Can we please keep this on topic rather than a titt for tatt competition.

Cheers
Y I Man

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

Post by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

I'm a huge fan of his and have him well inside my top ten all time brits but to say he dominated for 10 years is a false truth

Re: Joe Calzaghe's record

Post by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan

Where's the context? This is a direct translation with 1 interpretation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Calzaghe Appreciation

by imperialghosty on Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:21 pm

Going to have trawl through and find the statistics for this, there was a thread on the old 606 which showed Calzaghe only face a few top ten ranked guys.

by imperialghosty Today at 6:52 pm

By my own admission i've never said i'm a big Calzaghe fan which is neither here nor there when you try [u]using statistics that have no bearing on anything

Where's the context? One day your are more than happy to refer to the stats and then another day you say - and I quote "statistics that have no bearing on anything'' - referring to the same stats you wanted to use a few days earlier.

Don't try and talk your way out of this of son.

Totally exposed.

You're still stuck on repeat I see

Y I Man
I agree with you
But I don't appreciate hypocrisy from closet fans

Not a big Calzaghe fan. Thought he got a lucky decision over BHOP and RJJ was well past it. Kessler was impressive though I wouldn't take that away from him. If he had of fought RJJ in his prime he would have got a real beating

What was the point in this thread?

:sleep:

most over used post in boxing forum history.
lazy writing.

If I had a penny for the number of times the same poster has regurgitated the same post...I'd be a rich man now.

If your idea of how you're "winning" this debate is by observing that ghosty once said he was a huge fan of Calzaghe - you're going about things the wrong way.

Try to address a boxing-related argument; nothing more.

Not a fan of Calzaghe's record, but the fact that Ring Magazine had Peter Manfredo in their top ten the year before he fought Calzaghe must damage the credibility of this list. He is unlikely to be in the top ten of my lad's primary school, let alone in the world

Calzaghe had the chance at greatness, but lack of ambition from him and a risk adverse nature from Fish eyes means it could never be argued successfully that he delivered.

Prime Calzaghe beats Prime RJJ. Go to sleep Zeus

This thread is revolutionary.

STC wrote:This thread is revolutionary.

Yep, it goes round in circles.

hitmansam wrote:Y I Man
I agree with you
But I don't appreciate hypocrisy from closet fans

I thought he was a Calzaghe fan. Make your mind up.

hitmansam wrote:Not at all, Ring magazine review the year's top-10 contenders and then rank them for a given year based on the fighter's achievements and performances. There's no way this makes a difference to a review of Calzaghe's career because most of his best wins came against guys who were coming back from defeats and then achieved nothing after losing to him. Flawless buddy.

Yeah, but surely if Calzaghe beats them comfortably during that year, the Ring would rate them down as it wasn't an achievement to get beaten up by someone the Americans didn't rate until 2008?

Admittedly Calzaghe could have done more but we all know RJJ was too busykeeping his chin out of harms way, and Hopkins was continuing to be the hardest man in boxing to negotiate with.

Michaels, Sean wrote:Admittedly Calzaghe could have done more but we all know RJJ was too busykeeping his chin out of harms way, and Hopkins was continuing to be the hardest man in boxing to negotiate with.

I'm one of that rare breed who sit firmly on the fence with regard to Calzaghe. On talent alone, I have no doubt that he was a great fighter, but I can also see why some might be frustrated by his record.

However, Sean raises the point here that Jones Junior wasn't always in a hurry to test his mettle, either. Steve Collins once said words to the effect : " I fight men with boxing records and Roy Jones fights men with prison records, " and I don't believe he was too wide of the mark.

Sometimes I believe that there's a double standard practised when it comes to assessing these two.

Why is Ricky Hatton ducking Junior Witter?!

I realised that calzaghe had a pretty poor resume for someone who held a world title for years, but this sure brings it to light.
And so what if it has already been on another forum before, its not as if hitmansam is trying to get it published, its just another thread.