Anyone else hate it when you just watched an old movie or a tv show and you just want to talk about it with someone, but can't because everyone else already saw it a long time ago? Well, I'm feeling the same way now that I finally got around to watching Calzaghe vs Hopkins. What's the general opinion on this? I thought Hopkin's harder/cleaner punches won the fight for him compared to Calzaghe's pitty pat punches. And I really don't trust the compubox numbers on punches landed by Calzaghe. Didn't look like anywhere near that much to me. Also, I generally agree with Ledderman's scoring most of the time, but everything he said seemed completely off base to me in this fight. I gave Calzaghe five rounds at most.
calzaghe caught him with some very good shots. peeps like daggum need to realise how great calzaghe is and shit hopkins is.
calzaghe dominated that fight
where are his good punches? he landed like 5 good shots through the first 8 rounds. 5 punches in 8 rounds is good enough to win? he did better in rounds 9, 11, and 12 but hopkins had the fight won by then. here's a calzaghe highlight vid of all his clean shots. notice how there's only 1 punch in round 5, 3 in round 6, and 1 in round 8. he didn't put more in because they don't exist! i'm not sure the creator of that highlight even realized it but a couple of those clips hopkins is countering calzaghe with much better shots but i guess when you have nothing to work with you gotta grasp for straws.
Calzaghe 115-112.
Out worked Hopkins.
Early on Hopkins was getting off first then holding.
Calzaghe then found his rhythm began to land combos and make Hopkins miss.
Hopkins then decided to forgo with the throwing punches and just decided to jump in and hold.
Then when that didn't work he decided to that he got hit in the balls and then crawl around on the canvas like a dog (very nice play acting) Where is Russell Mora when you need him.
Had a little flurry after than, then Calzaghe finished the fight the stronger landing the more punches and dictating the pace of the fight.
hopkins won it pretty clearly. the only reasons someone would have it for calzaghe is if they thought calzaghe was landing when he really wasn't or they didn't use the scoring criteria and just wanted to punish hopkins for holding too much or taking too much time after being low blowed.
hopkins out landed calzaghe in more of the rounds. the compubox numbers are just flat out wrong. you can watch the calzaghe deception on youtube to see this. calzaghe lands maybe 2 clean shots in the round and compubox says he landed 20! hopkins landed clean right hands and left hooks while calzaghe hit air, gloves, or hopkins shoulders and back. then hopkins would move and repeat. a lot of people missed hopkins sneaky shots in between calzaghe wild flurries. yes hopkins had a low work rate but he had a high success rate(effective aggression) while at the same time making calzaghe swing and miss(ineffective aggression)
hopkins landed all the hard punches in the fight and buckled calzaghe's knees on about 5 occasions. calzaghe even turned his back to hopkins after being hurt 3 times. not very professional. people get on hopkins for buying time after being hit with an illegal shot but calzaghe bought time to clear his head after being hit with a legal shot!
hopkins doesn't get credit for his great defense which is a scoring criteria. when you say calzaghe threw too many punches you are inadvertently giving hopkins credit for defense because almost nothing clean landed. you don't get credit for missing but your opponent does get credit for making you miss.
It could have gone either way so a draw is most likely what you should have put up in the options but I think B-Hop took it by a little bit. Calzaghe was busier and carried the fight fast by swarming B-Hop with volume and activity but B-Hop landed cleaner shots on Calzaghe.
I've watched it twice (somehow). One time I felt like Calzaghe won a close but clear decision, the other time, I had Hopkins winning by a point. It was really just an ugly fight and very hard to score.