Calzaghe SMW reign vs. Hopkins MW reign

i guess according to these crazy sheep shaggin welshmen kessler was a better win for calzaghe than hearns was for hagler. hearns had came up from 147 just like tito. his best weight was 154 not 160, like tito. only hagler was hearns' first fight at MW, unlike tito who already annhilated titleholder and top5 MW william joppy. i guess the great tommy hearns wasnt as good a win as the half decent mikkel kessler, makes perfect sense. i mean he hadnt done anything at MW, it wasnt his best weight. who cares that hes in a diffrent league? what does that have to do with anything? its more impressive beating some one dimensional, no defense having, straight line fighting, weak resume having danish pastry who cant make a single adjustment to save his life.

hopkins fought 16 top ten guys in his title defenses. calzaghe fought 8 top ten guys in his title defenses. but both of them had crappy reigns compared to real fighters like carlos monzon. he fought the number 1, 2, or 3 guy in almost every defense. I wonder if people will say that Calzaghe's win over Kessler is better than Monzon's wins over Griffith because Griffith was a natural WW whereas Kessler was a natural SMW. :lol1: Pretty hilarious how people try and justify Calzaghe's career. Still can't believe that it's being argued that the Kessler win is better than the Trinidad win.

Hopkins two best defenses came against Welterweights, his reign at mw isnt that impressive. And we are not sure if the DLH match is actually a win because Floyd Sr who trained DLH was convinced he took a dive for business reasons.

Of course. I actually forgot that Trinidad was P4P #2 at the time Hopkins fought him aswell as #1 at MW. And people are actually trying to claim Kessler was a better win than Trinidad :lol1: :lol1: Quite stunning, to be honest. It's nonsense. People are trying to rewrite history to fit their own agendas and ignoring what was actually going on in boxing at the time.

hopkins fought 16 top ten guys in his title defenses. calzaghe fought 8 top ten guys in his title defenses. but both of them had crappy reigns compared to real fighters like carlos monzon. he fought the number 1, 2, or 3 guy in almost every defense.

Hopkins, and it's not even close. Dang, Hopkins LH Resume > Joe's SMW Resume Of course. I actually forgot that Trinidad was P4P #2 at the time Hopkins fought him aswell as #1 at MW. And people are actually trying to claim Kessler was a better win than Trinidad :lol1: :lol1: Quite stunning, to be honest.

Hopkins, and it's not even close. Dang, Hopkins LH Resume > Joe's SMW Resume

Kessler was more successful before and after Calzaghe fight than Joppy before and after Trinidad. And Kessler has a better 168 resume than Trinidad's 160 resume. Before, they were about the same. After, I'd say Kessler but Joppy still had good wins also. They're very comparable. Well yeah, I'd say so. Trinidad only has 1 good win there. But, beating Trinidad at 160 is obviously better than beating Kessler at 168. It's the same as saying beating Kessler at 168 is better than beating Hearns at 160 because Kessler's resume is better at 168 than Hearns' at 160.

Not much. But he was a good fighter and one of the best at MW at the time. Hence why I was comparing him to Kessler. They also went on to have good wins after their loss's to Tito and Calzaghe. They're very comparable IMO. But Kessler and Trinidad? :lol1: No. Kessler was more successful before and after Calzaghe fight than Joppy before and after Trinidad. And Kessler has a better 168 resume than Trinidad's 160 resume.

Who did Joppy beat again? Cherifi, the guy Robin Reid beat? Oh yeah, he beat the immortal Roberto Duran, best fighter of all time after Robinson. Boxrec turned out to be one of the worst inventions in boxing. Nobody is claiming that Joppy is an all time great but he beat numerous middleweights that were in the top 10, was a very solid condtender and one of the top middleweights at the time. He was the #2 ranked MW behind Bernard Hopkins going into the Trinidad fight and remained in the top 5 after the loss to Trinidad.

Who did Joppy beat again? Cherifi, the guy Robin Reid beat? Oh yeah, he beat the immortal Roberto Duran, best fighter of all time after Robinson. Not much. But he was a good fighter and one of the best at MW at the time. Hence why I was comparing him to Kessler. They also went on to have good wins after their loss's to Tito and Calzaghe. They're very comparable IMO. But Kessler and Trinidad? :lol1: No.

Who did Joppy beat again? Cherifi, the guy Robin Reid beat? Oh yeah, he beat the immortal Roberto Duran, best fighter of all time after Robinson.

And this issue that Trinidad was no good at 160 is complete nonsense. He overwhelmed William Joppy, a natural MW with 6 title defenses with his power and disposed of him in 6. Bernard Hopkins and PRIME Jermain Taylor couldn't even put Joppy on the canvas. And if you actually watch the fight between Hopkins and Trinidad, Hopkins was circling left to negate Trinidad's left hook. Despite dominating Trinidad for all 12 rounds, he still respected his power. Listen to the commentary. George Foreman was criticizing Hopkins all night for going toe to toe with Trinidad at times during the fight because Trinidad had that knockout power. Trinidad had incredible power at 160. Again, he proved that. I don't think even the people discrediting the win could even try to discredit his power at 160.

And this issue that Trinidad was no good at 160 is complete nonsense. He overwhelmed William Joppy, a natural MW with 6 title defenses with his power and disposed of him in 6. Bernard Hopkins and PRIME Jermain Taylor couldn't even put Joppy on the canvas. And if you actually watch the fight between Hopkins and Trinidad, Hopkins was circling left and smothered him to negate Trinidad's left hook. Despite dominating Trinidad for all 12 rounds, he still respected his power. Listen to the commentary. George Foreman was criticizing Hopkins all night for going toe to toe with Trinidad at times during the fight because Trinidad had that knockout power.

This is a very fair issue that hasn't been addressed yet. What top contenders did Kessler beat prior to his fight with Calzaghe? Andrade? Mundine? It is a good point. I'd say Trinidad's win over Joppy alone is better than anything Kessler had done up to that point. Let alone everything else he'd proved at lower weights. The idea is the Kessler win being even considered to be better than the Trinidad win is just laughable in my eyes.

I wish me son fought that fackin clown in 'is fackin prime. 'Opkins was too fackin scared.

Except that Kessler was a fraud and not a real big-league opponent. Poet What exactly has Kessler proven? That he can fight a pathetic assortment of tomato cans without having to leave Denmark? :thinking9: Poet Hopkins' worst opponent >>>>>> any of the Eurocans Kessler racked up his record against in his home town. Tough sh1t......deal with it. Poet And just which hometown victory over which tomato can established Kessler as the division #2 pray tell? Poet This is a very fair issue that hasn't been addressed yet. What top contenders did Kessler beat prior to his fight with Calzaghe? Andrade? Mundine?

Kessler was better than any other SMW other than Calzaghe at the time they where both weak divisions. And no I still disagree Hearns is not a good comparison Hearns carried his weight much better than Tito, Tito did hardly anything after losing to Hopkins. Hearns went on to win more titles even winning a belt at LHW. You only have to compare the two fighters physiques at 160 to know who carried the weight better. Yes, and Kessler is his best win at the weight. Still obviously not better than the Trinidad win. And I only stated he was the best MW in the world outside of Hopkins to show he was an absolutely legit MW. Which you are somehow trying to claim he wasn't, which, he absolutely was. Let's see, both Trinidad and Hearns beat the #2 ranked fighter at MW after moving up from 154. Both are natural WW's. Both did very little at MW but proved in their little fights there that they are one of, if not the best MW's in the world at the time. Look pretty comparable to me. I struggle to think of closer comparison there. Hearns style allowed him to go up in weight and just because Hearns moved up even further doesn't mean anything to how they were at 160 comparably. And Trinidad was a monster at 160. Physically, he looked fantastic. So I don't know where you're going with that one. That's just simply false. Saying beating Kessler is better than beating Trinidad at 160 is as laughable as saying it's better than beating Hearns at 160.

Maybe if he didn't prove he was head and shoulders above the rest of the MW division outside of Hopkins. And going back to the Hearns comparison, which is very good comparison by the way. It's like saying Calzaghe's win over Kessler is better than Haglers win over Hearns. Both, very ludicrous claims. Kessler was better than any other SMW other than Calzaghe at the time they where both weak divisions. And no I still disagree Hearns is not a good comparison Hearns carried his weight much better than Tito, Tito did hardly anything after losing to Hopkins. Hearns went on to win more titles even winning a belt at LHW. You only have to compare the two fighters physiques at 160 to know who carried the weight better.

Very close fight, the first fight with Green. But he didn't knock him out in the second fight but he was dominating. Oh I stand corrected. For some reason I thought he knocked him out.