British Joe fan, but he still lost!

"Ill never get beat by a white boy!" http://a669.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/90/l_a051cc4d7542d9162525125bc7041f4c.gif :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Hopkins wins by clinching!!! Amazing, his workrate sucked Is this you Elite Soldier? Where's my points bro? I'm broke ova here!

Im sorry but I disagree with you. I was drunk when I watched the fight live, and I thought Hopkins won. After sobering up, I decided to watch the fight again. Calzaghe landed a lot more cleaner shots than he appeared too. When Hopkins throws his punches, he only throws two, maybe three at a time, which makes them easy to count when they land. When Calzaghe throws, he throws maybe 5-10 shots, which can mask the effective shots he throws in his combinations. Calzaghe landed maybe five great shots, and on close inspection, may of hurt Hopkins a couple of times. Dont get me wrong this was a close fight, but it was a close fight Calzaghe won. But I dont know what fight the third judge was watching...he had a terrible scorecard.

Hops racism cost him this fight. Bottom line. The judges and their scores reflected that. Giving Joe the nod here is the equivalent of giving Sam Soliman the win against Winky Wright and maybe you can argue giving Spinks the win over Taylor. It's bullshit. If your offense isn't effective, fuck it. I don't care how much you're throwing, if you're not cracking a man's defense with clean shots or even really having an effect on him, but he's clocking you (even at low frequency) why should you get the win? I think a majority of fans here aren't interested in the sweet science but in "brawl 4 all" type events. These lower weight fighters in boxing that beat the hell out of each other often displaying little to no defensive prowess seems to be all anyone has an attention span for these days. HBO was biased as hell and had incentive to screw Hopkins if he didn't win definitively with a potential Jones Jr./Calzaghe bout on the horizon.

JC may have been the one moving forward but IMO with little effect. it can not be argued that B-Hop was the more accurate and landed the much cleaner shots. Yes it can, Joe's pct was higher, and on harder shots. I think his speed and flurries you struggle to see how effective or hard they are, but the compubox and judges were clearly clever enough to know, so were most viewers. Hopkins face rarely ends with marks, so for me that's a lame argument. The flurries of punches to body and head clearly took the wind out of Hopkins, confused and tired him to a decreasing pct, and more holding.

Funny.....in Britain everyone on television unanimously scored it in favour of Calzaghe. No joke. The only thing they were scared of was Calzone getting robbed in America. radio 5 live scored it by a point to hopkins, i tend to agree.

Threads bin ruined but some good points there still,like the last one about Hopkins not being able to cope with Callys handspeed and pace thus started to spoil....

JC may have been the one moving forward but IMO with little effect, B-Hop is well known for his counter punch/spoiler style of boxing and I thought this had superior results in relation to the JC slapping frenzy that looked messy and far from accurate, lots of leather thrown with little or no accuracy, it can not be argued that B-Hop was the more accurate and landed the much cleaner shots. JC pre fight called B-Hop all sorts of shit, yet when he was made to look pedestrian by a so called has been it now becomes one of his toughest fights and B-Hop is a legend! IMO far too many big fights are falling fowl to bad reffing or poor judging, IMO JC is a lucky boy to have snatched the SD. Chris

I've watched both the HBO and Setanta coverage and think people are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Watch the fight a 2nd time with "ooh watch his countering, he's done more damage" thrown around and in your head, you tend to watch out for it more and miss what the winner did to win. So you've over emphasised and lost the balance of pro's in each fighter, that lead to the decision and wide majority opinion on JOE WINNING. Threw more, and landed more than the so called accurate and effective counter puncher in Hopkins. Hops pct was lower because he was struggling with Joes pace, and wasn't quick enough to hit him, often enough. The time wasting shows this, he was out of breath. Disappointed on the thread starters use of words and rationale, like I say I think you've been easily influenced by the arguments on Nard winning too much, from the minority of Hopkins fans even, whom thought he won. Watch again and you'll see why the judges and majority judged Joe the winner increasingly post R4, with Hops progressively the in active loser.

Hopkins didn't have a single active round. There were rounds in which he landed good punches, but he still spent 2:30 of those in a negative posture. As a result he gave even those rounds away That's why they call it effective aggressiveness, and clean and effective punching. You're exaggerating. Purely. 2:30 my ass.

yep....... hell i can see joe winning 11 rounds to be honest....i gave him 10 though... teh ususal douchebags who think tehy're gods fo boxing are the ones who scored it for hopkins....dan "i had taylor beating pavlik 6-0 in the first fight" rafael, the "-edison miranda got robbed because there's a possiblity in the world that he won 9 rounds or more against abraham-club" like kevin iole.... i mean this guys are total douches......im expecting the other memebers of the my afvorite always wins like fischer, fernandez, kim had hopkins winning... Listen to the blatant HATIN goin on here.. It's ugly. Now every Boxing writer is a douchebag. :lol1:

Hopkins didn't have a single active round. There were rounds in which he landed good punches, but he still spent 2:30 of those in a negative posture. As a result he gave even those rounds away

Giving him every round after the first would actually be very reasonable. I'm not saying you had to give him all those rounds, but there were none that Hopkins clearly won. There were at least six that Joe clearly won On what??? Have you looked at this fight??????????? Giving him every round?? This is becoming a JOKE.

Stop lying. It was not a majority. Hopkins lost by five to seven points. And Joe could have done more if he wanted HaHA.. Stop lying. Stop lying. From what I understand it IS the majority. Why don't you do some research before you go spouting off again. Do me a fucking favor..

yep....... hell i can see joe winning 11 rounds to be honest....i gave him 10 though... Giving him every round after the first would actually be very reasonable. I'm not saying you had to give him all those rounds, but there were none that Hopkins clearly won. There were at least six that Joe clearly won

The Associated Press, ESPN and Sports Illustrated Sports Illustrated also said that the toughest sportsman in the world is Tiger Woods.

As is often the case, you were right first time on who won, instincts is usually right. I think we have the classic scenario of watching something back to check out peoples claims of the loser doing better than first thought. As a result sometimes you mostly watch the opponent for what he's doing and come to a less balanced view. Oh, effective, counter punching, without taking it all in context and what both fighters are doing throughout, like you usually do on the first watch. Joe was the more effective, post round 4 made it more his fight, less Hopkins, managed to land the most ever on him, and left Hops tired and confused, un able to hit much and just holding. Watch some of Hopkins other fights and you'll also come to a more balanced view, this is what Bernard does, well, but he couldn't do it enough to Joe.

Stop lying. It was not a majority. Hopkins lost by five to seven points. And Joe could have done more if he wanted yep....... hell i can see joe winning 11 rounds to be honest....i gave him 10 though... teh ususal douchebags who think tehy're gods fo boxing are the ones who scored it for hopkins....dan "i had taylor beating pavlik 6-0 in the first fight" rafael, the "-edison miranda got robbed because there's a possiblity in the world that he won 9 rounds or more against abraham-club" like kevin iole.... i mean this guys are total douches......im expecting the other memebers of the my afvorite always wins like fischer, fernandez, kim had hopkins winning...

HaHA.. You should check my pulse rate and see my pupils when I watch these fights. Everything is in slow motion for me. My adrenaline is pumping.. I need to ease off a little bit or my health will start to decline. :lol1: I haven't touched a drink in 6 months myself.. I'm dangerously sober these days. Yeah, that's about right, Mace. The majority of media professionals sitting ringside - outside of HBO's favorite judges/usual suspects - scored it in favor of Hopkins. This fight wasn't for the Olympic Trials. It was a pro fight. Stop lying. It was not a majority. Hopkins lost by five to seven points. And Joe could have done more if he wanted

not to mention his antic in the late rounds made me throw up in my mouth. If you scored it for Hopkins you'd do so with a heavy heart.