CLEAR conclusion about the Hopkins/Calzaghe/Jones drama !

But did Woods deserve a shot at Jones? That was the question. He probably deserved one less than Calzaghe, mandatory or not. Hopkins can go ahead and cite money reasons, but actions speak louder than words, especially when the fight you turn down could have made you far more money than the one you took instead. Morade Hakkar, man... now there's a name who's on everyone's lips. Yeah Woods was overmatched, but Roy just wanted to see where he was in that fight before moving up to HW to fight Ruiz... about Hopkins, he probably only took Calzaghe because he wanted to stay busy, he was tying to chase a Roy rematch at the ime but it never came... then Hopkins backed out of a calzaghe fight because the risk-reward ratio was more dangerous than a hakkar fight... i think he only took hakkar because he was struggling to find an opponent at the time

Woods was a mandatory. and My previous post was about the Jones not fighting Calzaghe drama. about Hopkins i know that he backed out of a fight citing money reasons But did Woods deserve a shot at Jones? That was the question. He probably deserved one less than Calzaghe, mandatory or not. Hopkins can go ahead and cite money reasons, but actions speak louder than words, especially when the fight you turn down could have made you far more money than the one you took instead. Morade Hakkar, man... now there's a name on everyone's lips. 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

You're wrong. I'm not doing anything but leveling the field and making it a little more fair. I am a Hopkins, Calzage AND Jones fan (yes, they exist!), so please, no need to see what I said as anything other than what it is. Calzaghe was a nobody? In 2002 he'd been the SMW champ for 5 years. Again, you could say the same thing about Hopkins -- until he beat Trinidad he was a nobody. You know that isn't true, though, because he's always been a great fighter. I've watched Hopkins since the Johnson fight in 1997. Most importantly: Please explain why Clinton Woods deserved a shot at Jones yet Calzaghe didn't? Woods was UNKNOWN, even in the UK. Woods was a mandatory. and My previous post was about the Jones not fighting Calzaghe drama. about Hopkins i know that he backed out of a fight citing money reasons

thats exactly what your doing, i personally dont think anyone ducked anybody.. it was the fact that MONEY was the big issue, calzaghe was a nobody in the 90's and early 2000's... if a fight with Benn, Eubank, Collins etc wasnt going to come off because of money reasons then NO WAY would a Calzaghe fight have happened. You're wrong. I'm not doing anything but leveling the field and making it a little more fair. I am a Hopkins, Calzage AND Jones fan (yes, they exist!), so please, no need to see what I said as anything other than what it is. Calzaghe was a nobody? In 2002 he'd been the SMW champ for 5 years. Again, you could say the same thing about Hopkins -- until he beat Trinidad he was a nobody. You know that isn't true, though, because he's always been a great fighter. I've watched Hopkins since the Johnson fight in 1997. Most importantly: Please explain why Clinton Woods deserved a shot at Jones yet Calzaghe didn't? Woods was UNKNOWN, even in the UK. You say "no way a fight would have happened", but it almost did. Why the hell did Bernard agree to one, then pull out the day before the contract was signed? Because he wanted more money? Please. How much did he make from fighting Morade Hakkar instead of Calzaghe? 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

And this is supposed to be a clear conclusion? What's not clear to me is why you failed to mention that Hopkins and Jones wouldn't fight Joe in 2002. It could easily be said that Hopkins and Jones waited until Calzaghe was old before fighting them. That is just as valid as saying Calzaghe waited until they were old. Joe Calzaghe had a fight arranged with Hopkins when Hopkins was 35, and according to some people, Jones never wanted anything to do with fighting Calzaghe. People are far too quick to put the blame on ther guy they dislike. Right? And that's exactly what you have done. thats exactly what your doing, i personally dont think anyone ducked anybody.. it was the fact that MONEY was the big issue, calzaghe was a nobody in the 90's and early 2000's... if a fight with Benn, Eubank, Collins etc wasnt going to come off because of money reasons then NO WAY would a Calzaghe fight have happened.

When Hopkins was 36 he was at his prime beating Trinidad. When Jones was 35 he was at his prime, moving up to Heavyweight and beating John Ruiz. Now Hopkins at 42 having lost 3 of the last 5 fights looses to Calzaghe who is 36 Then Jones at 39 having lost 3 of the last 6 fights looses to Calzaghe who is 36 Thats the reason Calzaghe dosen't get the credit he DOSEN'T deserve. Calzaghe you have beating two legends, we all agree on that... But it sounded better and seemed more right when Tarver said it against Jones and when Taylor humbly said it against Hopkins, when you say... it just seems I dont know akward. And this is supposed to be a clear conclusion? What's not clear to me is why you failed to mention that Hopkins and Jones wouldn't fight Joe in 2002. It could easily be said that Hopkins and Jones waited until Calzaghe was old before fighting them. That is just as valid as saying Calzaghe waited until they were old. Joe Calzaghe had a fight arranged with Hopkins when Hopkins was 35, and according to some people, Jones never wanted anything to do with fighting Calzaghe. People are far too quick to put the blame on ther guy they dislike. Right? And that's exactly what you have done. 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

I give Calzaghe credit for beating a good Hopkins and a Game Jones.. but Jones was definitely past it

funny as my man Nard put in his finest display against Pavlik so sounds like sour grapes. Pavlik is a kid known for knocking out people, not known for boxing skill, guys like that usually get a lost early in their careers and then focus more on boxing because they realize power can only get them so far, Bernard give Pavlik that first lost wish is actually good for Pavlik believe it or not, his 26

nah man, honestly... gatti is SHOT at 35... Vargas SHOT at 33, Morales SHOT at 34-35... EVERYONE is different... at 36, calzaghe is having some of his best performances and wins of his entire career... 2 months shy of 40... roy hasnt beaten an elite fighter in 5 years, and been knocked out twice.... Joe might be coming out of his prime... but roy hasnt been prime in 5 years... and after watching that fight... he is definitely shot as a fighter... u really cant say... oh, there 3 years apart so its no big deal... some guys are DONE at 34... some are still whoopin ass at 43... everyone has different peaks and primes, has nothing to do with age Anyone who doesn't understand this must be a moron. The absolute best Joe Calzaghe has ever been came when he was 34. At that age Roy (and most other fighters) wasn't close to his best. Calzaghe is 2 years past his peak and not declined much, Roy more like 10 years past his peak and almost unrecognizable from what he was.

Youre so so wrong my freind, as time passes by and we all get old, the record boooks wont record the pathetic anti-Calzaghe comments on this forum. The records will show (if he doesnt fight again) Jo Calzaghe 46-0 One of the greatest super middleweights who ruled the division for a decade, unified the titles, moved up to LH and won, then defended the LH title. Calzaghe was honoured by Ring magazine as an HoF boxer and rated as one of the best ever seen. It WONT say "Boxing forums said he was a slapping lucky ****er" as I said, No one puts Marciano over Luis, but someone who dosent know about boxing would claim Marciano is greater than Luis just because of his record. And i've seen it done over and again. Same case here with Calzaghe men, they only 2 names he has are two guys past their primes... and at 36 those guys were at their best... same age Joe is now ! So he will always get the same respect from real boxing fans.

You are an idot and dont seem to understand what a difference 3, 4 or 5 years make in boxing. This aint baseball boy. Look at most boxing career after 35 and you will see what im talking about, its not the same to get your first lost when you are 28 or 30 than when you are 35. Calzaghe should retire, and retire being know as a great fighter with a lot of respect, but if he never fights again wish I wont blame him for, believe me as times passes he will be forgoten and BHop and RJones will always be talked about as better fighters and all time greats even tought they both lost to Calzaghe. No one puts Marciano above Luis my friend. Youre so so wrong my freind, as time passes by and we all get old, the record boooks wont record the pathetic anti-Calzaghe comments on this forum. The records will show (if he doesnt fight again) Jo Calzaghe 46-0 One of the greatest super middleweights who ruled the division for a decade, unified the titles, moved up to LH and won, then defended the LH title. Calzaghe was honoured by Ring magazine as an HoF boxer and rated as one of the best ever seen. It WONT say "Boxing forums said he was a slapping lucky ****er"

OK, 36 lol..... He's still far removed from his prime, just like Jones is. nah man, honestly... gatti is SHOT at 35... Vargas SHOT at 33, Morales SHOT at 34-35... EVERYONE is different... at 36, calzaghe is having some of his best performances and wins of his entire career... 2 months shy of 40... roy hasnt beaten an elite fighter in 5 years, and been knocked out twice.... Joe might be coming out of his prime... but roy hasnt been prime in 5 years... and after watching that fight... he is definitely shot as a fighter... u really cant say... oh, there 3 years apart so its no big deal... some guys are DONE at 34... some are still whoopin ass at 43... everyone has different peaks and primes, has nothing to do with age

The Hopkins win is still very legit. Fans used to resort to the age argument until Hopkins beat the hell out o Pavlik, so now they give the whole slapper argument.

I guess you might of missed the Hopkins/Pavlik fight. I think it's available on youtube.

cal wont be 37 til next march OK, 36 lol..... He's still far removed from his prime, just like Jones is.

Stop being a whiney cry baby. Your nonsense would make some sense if Calzaghe was a young man himself. Calzaghe is 37 years old! HAhahaha, I mean, he's just "out" of his prime as Jones or Hopkins is. I would have loved to see Calzaghe fight these guys a long time ago as well but he's just as old as they are and you can't disscredit what he has done. Get over it. cal wont be 37 til next march

You are an idot and dont seem to understand what a difference 3, 4 or 5 years make in boxing. This aint baseball boy. Look at most boxing career after 35 and you will see what im talking about, its not the same to get your first lost when you are 28 or 30 than when you are 35. Calzaghe should retire, and retire being know as a great fighter with a lot of respect, but if he never fights again wish I wont blame him for, believe me as times passes he will be forgoten and BHop and RJones will always be talked about as better fighters and all time greats even tought they both lost to Calzaghe. No one puts Marciano above Luis my friend. The only "Boy" is your punk ass daddy that made your sorry ass. It doesn't matter that he's 3 years younger or in the case of Roy, only 2 years younger. HE'S 37 YEARS OLD!! What part of that don't you get? I understand he's younger but he's still past his prime himself, it doens't matter, he won....get over it. Respect to Calzaghe and his victories over two of the best in the game.

hopkins last 4 - dominate tarver, dominate winky, lose to joe, dominate pavlik... who deserves the credit?

he deserves getting credit for having their names on his record, but it must be dually noted that bhop has lost 3 or his last 5 fights and RJJ has been KTFO 2x. That means his wins against bhop and rjj does not make him an ATG. Bhop is 3 of his last 6 and those 3 wins are way better then those losses to Taylor.

This is getting boring! Calzaghe is an ATG and DOESN'T get the credit he deserves! FACT! he deserves getting credit for having their names on his record, but it must be dually noted that bhop has lost 3 or his last 5 fights and RJJ has been KTFO 2x. That means his wins against bhop and rjj does not make him an ATG.