Joe already Making Mistakes

tic toc... tic toc..last chance to change your pick!! :) Ice would love your take on the could mayweather beat pavlik thread goin on

tic toc... tic toc..last chance to change your pick!! :)

Clock is ticking..tic toc...tic toc....and on Saturday night all the talking will be done and the ONLY thing that will matter is what each guy does on that night in that ring against that opponent. Period

amatuer fights do count. Yeah, not only 120+ amateur fights, but 4 schoolboy ABA titles and 3 senior British ABA titles consecutively, being only the second boxer in history to win in 3 divisions: welterweight, light middleweight, middleweight. If he wins on Saturday, he has outstanding accomplishments from welter to light heavy, if we are to count the achievements as an amateur.

Is this a trick question? :) Nah, I was just thinking about all the arguments that Steward is a shitty trainer etc because his fighters doesn't listen to him and do what he says. Obviously the fighter knew much better how to win the fight than he did, so they didn't listen. So I ask, is it good to be so stupid that you just go along with everything your trainer tells you to? :lol1: That way you won't be having any ideas for yourself :fing02:

what a crap thread lol now the posters is tryin hard to see that joe is makin mistakes lol to be honest hes had more fights amatuer fights do count.

Maybe this is all a bluff? Without a doubt. Calzaghe has been studying Hopkins for at least 10 years. I guarantee that.

Is it good to be stupid in boxing? Is this a trick question? :)

most of the best boxers have really good amateur backgrounds like calzaghe,mayweather and cotto This is true, and it applies to many things in life. Solid foundations = better house.

For every guy who made it, like Hops and Toney, who didn't have extensive amateur backgrounds there are 100 who did. Is it good to be stupid in boxing?

most of the best boxers have really good amateur backgrounds like calzaghe,mayweather and cotto For every guy who made it, like Hops and Toney, who didn't have extensive amateur backgrounds there are 100 who did.

call me idiot all you want but you going to end up digging your own grave. does amateur boxing help yes, but not for everyone. some great amateur don't do well in the pros. it kinda like great college players not doing good in the NBA or NFL. no more head gear is one of the big difference. plus i was in the air force amateur its a different scoring system than the regular amateurs. most of the best boxers have really good amateur backgrounds like calzaghe,mayweather and cotto

I seriously, TOTALLY, doubt either man is underestimating the other I agree. They both know it will be a close, difficult fight, so they're just trying to pump themselves up to get that extra edge. It doesn't matter though. Hopkins will win :D

I seriously, TOTALLY, doubt either man is underestimating the other

14.04.08 - by James Slater: In an exclusive interview with Setanta sports in which Joe Calzaghe spoke to T.V presenter Des Lynham, the unbeaten Welshman spoke in depth about the man he is going to be fighting in less than five days time. Some of the things the 36 year old said were quite noteworthy, too.. "He is a bit of an idiot really. What else can I say ?" Calzaghe began when asked what he thought of Hopkins. "I don't think he understands, He's fighting somebody who is more experienced than him. He's 43, but I've probably been fighting for longer than him," Joe stated. This, for me, was a bit of a strange thing for Calzaghe to say. Does he really believe he is more experienced than the two-weight world champion? Let's take a look at the statistics, and see if Joe is right or wrong. In number of overall pro bouts, B-Hop holds the edge - with 54 fights on his resume compared to 44 on Calzaghe's. In number of world title fights, "The Executioner" has had 27, Joe C, on the other hand, has had 22. Both men's number are impressive here, but yet again B-Hop has the edge. And finally, in terms of length of pro career, Hopkins again has more experience - having boxed as a pro since way back in 1988. Calzaghe began his pro career back in 1993. This makes me ask, based on Joe's "I'm more experienced" quote - has Calzaghe looked at the stats? Hopkins, though this doesn't automatically make him the better fighter, IS the more experienced. Another thing Calzaghe said bothered me with regards to his preparations. "I never really watch fight tapes," Joe said. "I've watched just one fight of his fights." Joe never said which fight of B-Hop's this was, but, just one? Why not take the time to better study the masterful boxer you are soon to be swapping punches with? Sure, all fighters do things there own way, and some profess to never watching tapes at all. But, call it a hunch and nothing more, I now have at least a little feeling that Calzaghe is somewhat taking Hopkins for granted. Has over confidence gotten to "The Pride of Wales?" A new weight class, his first fight in America, against his very first all-time great opponent! Shouldn't Joe be trying to get every possible edge he can to win? And as for saying, and appearing to truly believe, that he is a more experienced fighter than the former middleweight and current light-heavyweight king; Joe is fooling himself on that score. Bernard Hopkins is the word experienced personified - in life as well as in the boxing ring. :nonono: Maybe this is all a bluff? I'm sure statements like this are designed to irritate the opponent. Calzaghe clearly doesn't under estimate Bernard Hopkins, he may be doing this to appear unprepared. He must of studied Hopkins previous fights. I find comparisons to this with Mayweather's preparations with Hatton. He claimed he didn't intend on watching any of Hattons previous fights, and later in the campaign claimed he was 'the greatest of all time'.

I'm sure Joe watched plenty of tapes of Hopkins. But given Joe's idiosyncracies the tapes wouldn't help; watching Hopkins fight Winky Wright wouldn't prepare Joe for this fight that muchl. Tapes can help, sure....but sometimes they end up doing very little. Some guys like to just go by the moment when they are in a fight... because every fight brings something new.

I'm sure Joe watched plenty of tapes of Hopkins. But given Joe's idiosyncracies the tapes wouldn't help; watching Hopkins fight Winky Wright wouldn't prepare Joe for this fight that muchl.

BURNER SAID: 2009 Rolls Royce GT-------------$475,000. Money spent on strippers a week--$ 50,000. Private Jet-----------------------$ 2,000,000. Retiring as the GREATEST boxer EVER---Priceless. There are some things Money May cant buy. No disrespect, my man, because Floyd is OBVIOUSLY an unreal fighter but..in terms of all-time greatness.... you have to realize and think about what that actually means...you take a guy like Sugar Ray Leonard... who tackled Duran, Hearns, Hagler, Benitez....Ray certainly understood that you had to beat the top dawg to be seen as the one... even when he came out of retirement and went down to 154...he went after TERRY NORRIS of all people... he could have easily stayed at 160 or 168 and went after a lesser champion and won... but he went for it...he came out of a LONG retirement and went STRAIGHT TO Hagler! No tune up, nothing. Regardless of if you thought he won the fight or not (I say he clearly did) that is AMAZING and that is also a TRUE MARK OF A TRUE LEGENDARY CHAMPION...For Floyd to break into THAT type of realm he needs to get in with Cotto, Margarito, those types... I will put it this way...if SRL was in his position he would know that he needs to, and would, SEEK OUT the Cottos of the world. Not the Oscar rematch type fights. I personally think Floyd beats Cotto....but he has to do it..you cant be great based on speculation of what you think would happen if he did

Good call, Norm!! :) But, seriously, for what it is worth. a solid amateur career can do A LOT for a guy and when people point to a unique guy (Toney and Hops usually come to mind) and talk about how he only had a few amateur fights but is a very good pro well, I have seen those guys, too, but the fact of the matter is that for every guy who didn't have a deep amateur career but made it to the top as a pro, well, I can name 15 former top amateur guys who made it for every one that didn't. The amateur boxing program, in particular in the USA over the years, is the proven breeding ground for future contenders and champions, NO DOUBT Of course, it makes sense. It's like anything -- the most well-schooled usually rise to the top. Doesn't matter what profession or artform it is. If the foundations are solid, you get a better house that stands up for longer.

if iceman says something about a guy on the world level's amateur record, it'd be a good idea to believe it. i've read most of the shit he's posted, and he seems like a cat who cares about his reputation. im not kissing ass or anything, just stating the obvious. ice ain't the one to speak up about something and not know 100% for it to be accurate especially when regarding a hall of famer's amateur record. Good call, Norm!! :) But, seriously, for what it is worth. a solid amateur career can do A LOT for a guy and when people point to a unique guy (Toney and Hops usually come to mind) and talk about how he only had a few amateur fights but is a very good pro well, I have seen those guys, too, but the fact of the matter is that for every guy who didn't have a deep amateur career but made it to the top as a pro, well, I can name 15 former top amateur guys who made it for every one that didn't. The amateur boxing program, in particular in the USA over the years, is the proven breeding ground for future contenders and champions, NO DOUBT