Jump to content

JOE CALZAGHE AND RICHIE WOODHALL ON DAVID HAYE


Faulks
 Share

Recommended Posts

EDITOR'S CHOICE: JOE CALZAGHE AND RICHIE WOODHALL ON DAVID HAYE

Web users get a taste of the mag's exclusive new column

 

TARGET: But will Haye ever meet Wlad?

DAVID HAYE has said he’ll retire in October. Do you think he will stick to that?

 

Joe Calzaghe: I don’t know. At the end of the day he has his own mind and knows what he wants to achieve in boxing. He’s won a version of the world heavyweight title, he’s made a fortune from his last fight and I’m sure he’ll make a lot of money from his next defence, so good luck to him. And if he says he’s going to retire, I believe him.

 

Richie Woodhall: I don’t. I think the Klitschkos are playing games, to be honest.

 

I think David Haye is a wealthy guy and he’ll earn a lot of money from his next couple of fights. But the Klitschko fight will always be the one and that will keep him in the game.

 

BN: If he does retire in October, and taking the Klitschkos out of the equation, who do you think he should fight between now and then?

 

JC: He has to fight one of the top-rated fighters. Ruslan Chagaev springs to mind. He’s a decent fighter and he’s not too big, so I think it would be an exciting fight to watch. But, to be honest, the heavyweight division is pretty poor.

 

RW: I think a dangerous opponent would be Alexander Povetkin. I remember him from the 2004 Olympics when he won gold. He would give David a lot of credibility. Problem is, Povetkin is not that well known over here.

 

BN: David still seems to be getting better. How hard will it be for him to walk away at his peak?

 

JC: I can’t go into his mind. It’s a great thing to walk away at the top but it rarely happens. I did it and I’m proud that I managed to get out at the top. Only he knows about his dedication, how much he wants to keep training.

 

RW: It’s very rare that a boxer does walk away at the top. Joe’s an exception and I don’t think David will walk away. Joe beat everyone, there was no one left to beat but, for David, while the Klitschkos are about, there’s always that question mark.

 

BN: Did he make a mistake in announcing he was going to retire in October?

 

JC: I don’t think so. Maybe it’s part of the game like the cat-and-mouse that the Klitschkos are playing right now. Maybe it’s a ploy to say that he’s going to retire.

 

RW: When he said it in the first place it might have been to get the Klitschkos to fight him. But it’s backfired in a way because they’re calling his bluff by saying they’re not going to fight him and he’ll have to get in the queue. They’ll want to prove that David is not going to do what he says he’s going to do.

 

JC: People retire and come back though, it’s nothing. Floyd Mayweather has retired about 10 times. David is still young, he’s certainly improving and it would be a great disappointment if he didn’t continue. I didn’t reach my peak until I was 34, 35 and I was a super-middleweight. As a heavyweight, he’ll get better as he gets older. He’s still young and he’s not been in many hard fights. I definitely think there’s another 20 per cent to come.

 

BN: If he sticks to his word, though, how will history judge him?

 

JC: He’s not been a champion for long enough. Being great is all about beating the best and longevity. He had an excellent win against [Nikolai] Valuev away from home but when it comes to his legacy, he has a lot to prove. The Klitschkos will always be hanging over him, but only David Haye can decide how strongly he feels about his legacy. He’s won a version of the world heavyweight title and you can’t take that away from him but when it comes to being a great champion, you need to fight the best.

 

RW: I think deep down he knows that himself. And he’s doing everything he possibly can, you can’t take that away from David, he’s trying to get it on. He’ll put in two great displays between now and October, stay motivated and the Klitschkos will come.

 

http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/BN08/detail.asp?id=2239

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back at heavyweight history as opposed to buying into shtick, and I write this using examples given to us such as Louis, Marciano, Patterson, Frazier and Ali, I think that a heavyweight champion should look to conduct the business that fans and sports in general expect of him. In the case of David Haye, we have been promised much, dating back BEFORE he actually had a heavyweight fight, and delivered quite arguably much less.

 

Yes, he won a belt....but after how much window shopping?

 

Yes, he has defended that belt, but against who?

 

Has he unified?

 

What are his reasons for backing away from the Klitschko's - over multiple episodes and years?

 

Now go back to to my second sentence and mix in all of Haye's promises to the world and think of them in the context of what he has done and his reasoning for doing it, and before placing 80% blame on the Klitschko's ask yourself why contenders such as Johnson, Peter, Chambers, Chisora, Gomez and Arreola seem to be able to find away to step up and take these guys one despite not having the same level of chance, obvious talent, popularity, fan backing and charisma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back at heavyweight history as opposed to buying into shtick, and I write this using examples given to us such as Louis, Marciano, Patterson, Frazier and Ali, I think that a heavyweight champion should look to conduct the business that fans and sports in general expect of him. In the case of David Haye, we have been promised much, dating back BEFORE he actually had a heavyweight fight, and delivered quite arguably much less.

 

Yes, he won a belt....but after how much window shopping?

 

Yes, he has defended that belt, but against who?

 

Has he unified?

 

What are his reasons for backing away from the Klitschko's - over multiple episodes and years?

 

Now go back to to my second sentence and mix in all of Haye's promises to the world and think of them in the context of what he has done and his reasoning for doing it, and before placing 80% blame on the Klitschko's ask yourself why contenders such as Johnson, Peter, Chambers, Chisora, Gomez and Arreola seem to be able to find away to step up and take these guys one despite not having the same level of chance, obvious talent, popularity, fan backing and charisma.

 

I agree with most of your post but the situation isn't all onesided.

 

For every Peter, Chambers etc there are quotes from Valuev, Povetkin, Haye and even Solis about the one sided conditions.

Also to counter the names you put forward which don't really prove anything - you could say that Valuev, Ruiz and Harrison had no problems in make a fight with Haye, so why does Wlad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruiz was done (and a mandatory), Valuev was done and cahsing in and Harrison would have taken his pay day for a physical abusing. Come back when Haye fights someone who has something to lose.

 

Povetkin's claims were frankly bizarre, Solis was a mandatory and complaining about his cut but didn't let it go to purse bids...I wonder why? Barrett complained about Haye's contract...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruiz was done (and a mandatory), Valuev was done and cahsing in and Harrison would have taken his pay day for a physical abusing. Come back when Haye fights someone who has something to lose.

 

Povetkin's claims were frankly bizarre, Solis was a mandatory and complaining about his cut but didn't let it go to purse bids...I wonder why? Barrett complained about Haye's contract...

 

Come Back? lol

 

For every fighter thats had a problem there is another thats been fine on both sides regardless of them being "done" or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being done and getting a pay day for just turning up is very different to being in your prime and having something to lose. Not notice Haye hasn't faced a prime fighter since macca...

 

 

i agree with iam since macca haye has been fighting fighters (oap's) on the decline.

 

if your planning in retiring why would you fight prime fighters? especially when the average fan will pay 40 quid to see him every time and buy the ppv's, easy money.

 

Klitschko fight i cant see coming off ever, hayes legacy is already ruined by himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="iamasadlittleboy" data-cite="iamasadlittleboy" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="6593" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="WelshDevilRob" data-cite="WelshDevilRob" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="6593" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Age is just a number - 36ish is prime these days. grin//</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> So Valuev...who hasn't fought since, was in his prime? Mormeck was in his prime? Oh man.</p><p> Vitali dominated a pre-prime Gomez, Dereck Chisora spanked a "prime" Danny Williams...</p><p> >_></p><p> <_><p> </p><p> </p><p> 36 is my age hence the smiley and reference to prime. So your taking my words out of context.</p><p> </p><p> Valuev has never had a prime that I recall he is awkward and had success because of his size rather than ability. </p><p> Also, what relevance has Valuev having "not fought since" got to do with anything? He's had some injuries since the fight. He tried to make a fight with Vitali but claimed firstly VK was "ignoring" him and then was too hard to negotiate which he stated Haye wasn't.</p><p> Mormeck was ranked as the No.1 in the World by most observers - was he at 28? I don't think he was.</p></_></p></div></blockquote>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never bought into this argument about age - if anything, most opf the modern fighters can go up and down in weight and carry on for for several years longer than their predecessors. Just because someone's 36, 38 or whatever doesn;t automatically diqualify them from being fit and strong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never bought into this argument about age - if anything, most opf the modern fighters can go up and down in weight and carry on for for several years longer than their predecessors. Just because someone's 36, 38 or whatever doesn;t automatically diqualify them from being fit and strong.

 

When they've not fought since (Ruiz), or been niggled by injuries that didn't strike them earlier in their career (Valuev) then age needs to be considered. Of course some fighters age quicker than others (Morales being a great example) but the body does slow down and take damage less well. Modern fighters aren't at their peak in their mid 30's.

 

A look at US HW champions (I've not got the stats at hand for international) show that very few have managed to hold a HW title beyond the age of 35 (Byrd and Briggs were both 35, Holyfield 38, Holmes 35, Ali 36, Walcott 38, Johnson 36 and of course 46 year old Foreman). The average for a fighter to lose his title in the ring has been around 30 since the days of Sullivan. Age it's self doesn't disqualify you from being a suitable rival but age, inactivity (Valuev and Ruiz both suffered there) etc would show they were far from "prime" heavyweights.

 

Fighters like Hopkins, Glen Johnson, Vitali Klitschko are exceptions to the rule, much like Walcott, Moore, Foreman, Duran. History is full of late bloomers and fighters done before they were 30. Age isn't a single factor but one of several.

 

Valuev's prime may not have been great but he was much more active than he has been in recent years ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back at heavyweight history as opposed to buying into shtick, and I write this using examples given to us such as Louis, Marciano, Patterson, Frazier and Ali, I think that a heavyweight champion should look to conduct the business that fans and sports in general expect of him. In the case of David Haye, we have been promised much, dating back BEFORE he actually had a heavyweight fight, and delivered quite arguably much less.

 

Yes, he won a belt....but after how much window shopping?

 

Yes, he has defended that belt, but against who?

 

Has he unified?

 

What are his reasons for backing away from the Klitschko's - over multiple episodes and years?

 

Now go back to to my second sentence and mix in all of Haye's promises to the world and think of them in the context of what he has done and his reasoning for doing it, and before placing 80% blame on the Klitschko's ask yourself why contenders such as Johnson, Peter, Chambers, Chisora, Gomez and Arreola seem to be able to find away to step up and take these guys one despite not having the same level of chance, obvious talent, popularity, fan backing and charisma.

 

I agree with most of your post but the situation isn't all onesided.

 

For every Peter, Chambers etc there are quotes from Valuev, Povetkin, Haye and even Solis about the one sided conditions.

Also to counter the names you put forward which don't really prove anything - you could say that Valuev, Ruiz and Harrison had no problems in make a fight with Haye, so why does Wlad.

 

Thats easy Rob, because the 3 you mention are Z class fighters, grateful for any opportunity, and the Klitch brothers are not.

 

Haye, in fact, should be grateful to them for even bothering to negotiate with him and his diabolical record at Heavyweight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...