Hopkins is a fucking cheater

He could have the body of a 27 year old, but that doesn't stop him from his boxing skills significantly decreasing. However, I give Joe full credit for beating Bernard because A. I thought Bernard would win, B. Bernard was sitll one of the best fighters in the sport at 43. This fight was close to the all the people who say it wasn't. The highest score you could have it would be 115-112 for Calzaghe. I scored it 114-113 for Hopkins, but there were toss up rounds. Hopkins smothered Calzaghe not making him land effective shots. Hopkins did land effective sneaky shots on the inside and in the clinch. He got hit low and did milk for time, but he is not a cheater. If the rules let you have 5 minutes, that's there problem. If anything it showed his age. The Hopkins against Echols in the second fight (who was thrown over, hurting his shoulder really bad) showed his bravery. Hopkins did get hit low and he was trying to get a point deduction for Calzaghe to have the cards be closer. I was impressed with both men. The only thing I would complain about Hopkins would be his milking for time (which wasn't that big of a deal) and his refusal to give Calzaghe credit during the post fight conference. At least say he did a good job, but I thought I put on a clinc. He didn't put on a clinic though. Not even close. Oh yeah, and Calzaghe himself adimitted this was a close fight.

Hopkins was NOT in the same physical condition he was even against Tarver. Need proof? Look at this transcript: Obviously Shilstone completely dodged the question which can only mean that Hopkins was not in the same condition. BTW, we hear about Hopkins cheating yet no one talks about how Joe had to continuously resort to punching on the back, behind the head, and low blows because he couldn't land a clean punch on Hopkins to save his life for a majority of the fight. I thought he had the body of a 26 year old though?

cal didn't dominate hop at all...........he couldn't even hit hop..........the fight was close.........cal was even disappointed after the fight..........i respect both guys..........you sound like a joe cal ricky hatton fan.............man, i wonder what you were posting when floyd beat hatton.........the ref cheated hatton huh????......hop made cal look bad..........hop makes everyone look bad..........deal with it.........and stop lying to us saying cal dominated hop.........lol.......... what.....are.......you....trying....to...........say...............?

slaphappy got a gift victory.

Hopkins was NOT in the same physical condition he was even against Tarver. Need proof? Look at this transcript: John Chavez: All right thanks Naazim. I had one real quick question for Mackie. You spoke, very recently about stating the truth and not having to hype up a fight. You worked with Bernard two years ago. Are you honestly stating that we will see a better physical specimen than the Antonio Tarver fight that you worked with him? Mackie Shilstone: Well I really look at it this way. I don't like to compare one fight to another or one situation because they are totally different. The way I look at it is two men are going to get into a ring – which is a theater of operation very similar to combat – of course there are no heroes in boxing. And no one is defending their country for freedom. But it basically is war. And inside that 20 by 20 theater of operation two men are going to get together. And with all the benefits of Mr. Enzo Calzaghe who is a wonderful trainer and won Trainer of the Year and so forth and so on. And with the esteemed colleagues of mine – as I'm sure Brother Naazim will tell you. These two men are going to get in there and have to size each other up. And that's where it really starts. Bernard's going to go in there and do what he needs to do in a manner consistent that he surmises from seeing what the opponent is doing. And his body becomes relevant – if it becomes relevant – it is his mind, it is his inner drive, it is his instinct that will far out weigh anything to do with the body or what it looks like. Obviously Shilstone completely dodged the question which can only mean that Hopkins was not in the same condition. BTW, we hear about Hopkins cheating yet no one talks about how Joe had to continuously resort to punching on the back, behind the head, and low blows because he couldn't land a clean punch on Hopkins to save his life for a majority of the fight.

Calzaghe knocking Hopkins out is laughable. He did win round 9 but i thought he lost round 10. To be honest this is old news.

Joe Calzaghe - 181 lbs Bernard Hopkins - 190 lbs

Owned. Owned. Once again how can you compare 36 to 43. You are blinded so much by your fanaticism you fail to acknowledge something we in the real world refer to as common sense. This is spilling into anti Calzaghe which isn't true to the topic. Owned, grow up mate, Hopkins mostly pushed him, and Calzaghe was up within a few seconds. If that's a half decent shot of Hops why didn't it put him down for 5, why could he not exploit this so called advantage in the first round? Owned. 36 compares with 43 seems obvious on paper. Your showing extreme imaturity and stupidity by not being able to look deeper than some basic numbers. When comparing age and athleticism, fatigue, it's key to not the style of the athlete, you moron. I explained this on a prior page you must have rushed along with your short pointless stabs in the debate. Calzaghe's style is chasing, aggressive, high punch out put, pressure and more, which uses A LOT of energy. Hopkins style is defend, minimal movement, minimal punch output, very selective foot work, movement, punches, which uses MINIMAL energy. Factor that in to it and it's not quite so black and white, rarely is. Calzaghe spent probably something like 40%+ more energy in the fight than Hopkins. He wasn't tired despite this high output, athletically demanding style. Yet Hopkins was tired with 40+% less energy, work, output and athleticism. If the were both in the middle, at 40 (Calz 3 yrs older, Hops 3 yrs younger) you would see the same again based on what we saw.

Hopkins a natural LHW, thats dumb as hell, if he had been a natural LHW Bouie Fisher would've orchestrated Hopkins' campaign at 175 rather than 160, he lost his debut at that weight don't forget, and fighters don't fight in one weight until they're forty and then move up to their "natural" division, what bull Calzaghe was above his natural weight too, yeah, but Calzaghe fans have been saying for years (as has Cal) that making 168 was murderous for him, and at 175 he would be a whole different beast. I'm not saying thats true or not, I'm saying you can't support one without weighing up the other I have credited Calzaghe with being a very fast fighter, with a tremendous workrate, but I do not believe he is the technical genius that you seem to think he is. Roy Jones' is a technical fighter, he has adjusted in the past to combat different styles/bigger fighters. Against Toney and Hop he pot-shotted, against other guys like Tate he sat down and went for power. He could adapt when things weren't working like in the Montell fight when Roy started to put rounds in the bag. But Calzaghes opposition, to be fair, have never been good enough to show any extra dimensions in Joes game. Robin Reid did You are right it is important to consider both sides, and yes Calzaghe has struggled to make 168 recently, which is why he is now at LHW, but I think SMW is his best weight. Without question, Bernard is a natural LHW now, and was always naturally big for a MW, but with excellent conditioning. On Roy Jones, I would say for most of his career he was the definition of a non-technical fighter, relying on his speed and athleticism with scant regard for the more technical aspects of the game. Calzaghe is much better schooled than Roy ever was. I agree that Roy has improved with time and that in his commentary shows terrific technical understanding, but I'm not sure he really demonstrates it in the ring. I find it stange that people are unable to appreciate/ see Joe's skill, because it is not that different than the type of talents Bernard Hopkins has, just a little more geared towards attack than defense. Good posts in this thread today though Kilrain.

Hmm, I dont know, maybe because a 43 year old Hopkins fighting above his natural weight was able to give Calzaghe, supposedly at his peak, a competitive fight? You fucking moron. Owned. not to mention dropping him LOL Owned. Calzaghe is at his peak only in the eyes of Americans who want him to be so they can give Hopkins more credit than he deserves. He isn't. Joe Calzaghe, just like Hopkins, is aging, and fighting above his natural weight. Hopkins has more fights at LHW than Joe does, and to my eyes looks very comfortable at the weight, indeed he probably weighed close to the cruiser limit against Calzaghe and with not an ounce of fat on him was hardly blown up. Manny Steward believes that Hopkins has always been a natural LHW. Lots of what you say is good, Kilrain, you are just too quick to credit Hopkins without any criticism and too quick to criticise Calzaghe without crediting him. Once again how can you compare 36 to 43. You are blinded so much by your fanaticism you fail to acknowledge something we in the real world refer to as common sense.

Hopkins a natural LHW, thats dumb as hell, if he had been a natural LHW Bouie Fisher would've orchestrated Hopkins' campaign at 175 rather than 160, he lost his debut at that weight don't forget, and fighters don't fight in one weight until they're forty and then move up to their "natural" division, what bull Calzaghe was above his natural weight too, yeah, but Calzaghe fans have been saying for years (as has Cal) that making 168 was murderous for him, and at 175 he would be a whole different beast. I'm not saying thats true or not, I'm saying you can't support one without weighing up the other I have credited Calzaghe with being a very fast fighter, with a tremendous workrate, but I do not believe he is the technical genius that you seem to think he is. Roy Jones' is a technical fighter, he has adjusted in the past to combat different styles/bigger fighters. Against Toney and Hop he pot-shotted, against other guys like Tate he sat down and went for power. He could adapt when things weren't working like in the Montell fight when Roy started to put rounds in the bag. But Calzaghes opposition, to be fair, have never been good enough to show any extra dimensions in Joes game. Robin Reid did

Hmm, I dont know, maybe because a 43 year old Hopkins fighting above his natural weight was able to give Calzaghe, supposedly at his peak, a competitive fight? You fucking moron. Calzaghe is at his peak only in the eyes of Americans who want him to be so they can give Hopkins more credit than he deserves. He isn't. Joe Calzaghe, just like Hopkins, is aging, and fighting above his natural weight. Hopkins has more fights at LHW than Joe does, and to my eyes looks very comfortable at the weight, indeed he probably weighed close to the cruiser limit against Calzaghe and with not an ounce of fat on him was hardly blown up. Manny Steward believes that Hopkins has always been a natural LHW. Lots of what you say is good, Kilrain, you are just too quick to credit Hopkins without any criticism and too quick to criticise Calzaghe without crediting him.

Hopkins is indeed a cheat.

I just saw it on youtube and I watched it again, how the fuck can someone think Hopkins won or will win if he was 6 years younger? Hmm, I dont know, maybe because a 43 year old Hopkins fighting above his natural weight was able to give Calzaghe, supposedly at his peak, a competitive fight? You fucking moron.

I just saw it on youtube and I watched it again, how the fuck can someone think Hopkins won or will win if he was 6 years younger? Calzaghe dominated Hopkins and it should have been a UD if it wasn't for the bias judge. A 28-33 year old Calzaghe wins against prime Hopkins a bit closer. Judges are paid by promoters. So are refs.

Took you 2 months to realise lol? I just saw it on youtube and I watched it again, how the fuck can someone think Hopkins won or will win if he was 6 years younger? Calzaghe dominated Hopkins and it should have been a UD if it wasn't for the bias judge. A 28-33 year old Calzaghe wins against prime Hopkins a bit closer.

where is part 7 of the video???

What technical skill did you see in the Lacy fight? Calzaghe basically threw a thousand odd punches at a guy who was overrated to begin with, and punched out the victory. It's not as if he employed feinting techniques, shoulder rolls, switch-hitting, great lateral movement, dancing left and right. He kept on his toes and just punched the hell out of the overmuscled and overmatched Lacy. Nothing more. The Kessler fight he brought in some adjustments and figured out some early problems. He started slowly and worked his game out. Kessler was strong in the first couple of rounds but basically he was study and straight ahead, he wasn't no bag of tricks boxer. Kessler was strong with the right uppercut but Calzaghe just had to tighten up. It wasn't like he drastically switched tactics. You are confusing "slick boxing skill" with "technical boxing skill". Calzaghe is not Mayweather for sure, and nor is he prime Joel Casamayor, his skills do not lie in those areas. What Joe is, is a master of distance and positioning. Lacy hardly extended him I admit, but remember that Lacy did not get merely beaten, he got destroyed. Calzaghe did this by knowing what Lacy was going to do before he did it, moving into a position to avoid the attack, unload his own shots on a Lacy who had no idea where Joe was, move away to avoid Lacy's response, and so on ad infinitum. Calzaghe can only throw those hundreds of shot because 1) he is not on the receiving end of anything coming back, and 2) he his opponent canot prevent him from doing so, all achieved with distance and positioning. The same was true in the Kessler fight, IMO even more impressively because Kessler is a well schooled technical boxer himself, and at times he made Kessler look stupid. I remember moments in R6 when Joe is slipping Kessler combinations with his feet planted and relying solely on defensive head movement, like James Toney, and time after time saw Joe standing at the side of Kessler watching him punch into the space where Joe had just been, before opening up with a flurry of punches. ALL of this, the foundation of both these wins is achieved by extreme technical proficiency, all the more impressive because Joe appears to determine the right course of action on the fly as it were, without having any detailed gameplan. I repeat, Joe Calzaghe is one of the best technical boxers out there, I'm not sure I can think of a single boxer who does what he does quite as well. That his skill is not visible to so many of you seems cray to me, especially in a world where Miguel Cotto is routinely hailed as an excellent technical boxer.

Lol. I find it hilarious how apparently a 36 year old Hopkins (against Trinidad) is supposed to beat the harder punching Calzaghe around 30-33. Jokers... A 181 lbs Joe Calzaghe beat a 190 lbs Bernard Hopkins. You are blinded by your fanaticism. Calzaghe was going forward throughout nine but he was missing virtually every punch, he looked terrible frankly, like he did throughout the entire fight. He only won because Hopkins' legs got tired and father time began to grind on the champ. Pure and simple. A prime Hopkins would've murdered that boy, no question. Agreed. I love how people say that Hopkins being 43 years old doesn't count because Joe was 36. That makes perfect sense... :ugh:

What technical skill did you see in the Lacy fight? Calzaghe basically threw a thousand odd punches at a guy who was overrated to begin with, and punched out the victory. It's not as if he employed feinting techniques, shoulder rolls, switch-hitting, great lateral movement, dancing left and right. He kept on his toes and just punched the hell out of the overmuscled and overmatched Lacy. Nothing more. The Kessler fight he brought in some adjustments and figured out some early problems. He started slowly and worked his game out. Kessler was strong in the first couple of rounds but basically he was study and straight ahead, he wasn't no bag of tricks boxer. Kessler was strong with the right uppercut but Calzaghe just had to tighten up. It wasn't like he drastically switched tactics. Prior post was great, but it's now spiralling onto dis crediting Calzaghe on several other levels, topics, history etc. To be fair not that I agree, but it's fairly well executed. Still I think it's better that all too common stuff goes elsewhere, in a new or old thread. The topic is about Hops allegedly cheating in R10 afterall.