Calzaghe vs Dawson at 175 lbs

[RubenSonny]

Not really. If I was to evaluate Tarver's resume I would only list his two wins over Jones. I would just state that the loss doesn't hurt him (for reasons stated), but it would still be classed as a loss

True. But I still cant give it to him.

I said you were contradicting yourself by saying that Bhop should have been DQ'ed and was fouling since you earlier said we can only go with whats official. You also bring up that he would've been DQ'ed with another ref the same thing can be said about judging perhaps if there were different judges it could be done differently. The official outcome of the fight doesn't change what happened in the ring and thats why I always go with who I fought won.

Hopkins fight night weight against Tarver was listed as 182 lbs
He refused to take the unofficial weigh in against Calzaghe, and he was clearly bigger and stronger than Calzaghe (see round 4 Hopkins-Calzaghe)

Also
********boxing:

http://www.ea$tsideboxing.com/boxing/Pavlik-Hopkins.php

Fight Hype:

http://www.fighthype.com/pages/content4150.html
Thomas Hauser has also stated that HBO on occasion has deliberately understated fighters fight night weights. Tarver was heavier than stated against Jones for example

For Hopkins-Pavlik, Hopkins was reported to be 180 lbs come fight night and Pavlik at 171 lbs. Either way he was the bigger man

Hopkins wasn't prime for that fight and very old its common sense that you put on some weight when your older as this always happens in boxing it doesn't neccesarily make him the bigger man. JMM has said to weigh 145 lbs on fight night making the difference between him and Floyd not that much, but its not as simple as that since it was old man fat.

I can't see Kessler getting koed by the like of Abraham or Froch. Even the over the hill Eubank he beat wouldnt get koed by any of those guys

Juan Laporte didn't get stopped by Sanchez doesn't make him better than Gomez, thats all conjecture on your part anyway. Better chin does not always mean better fighter.

lol
He was facing his mandos like Hopkins, and like Hopkins his mandos weren't very good

And Hopkins resume at 160 is greater than Calzaghes at 168.

Hopkins original choice of opponent was over the hill Jones, that fell through so he decided to fight Tarver. Solid win? No doubt. Hopkins won every single round, proving he was the much better fighter. Calzaghe in turn beat him.
I had him losing Hopkins-Calzaghe, so we are going to have to disagree on him deserving to have it at 45

Hopkins original choice of opponent is irrelevant especially when Calzaghe fought Jones even futher along than that. Calzaghe was closer to his prime and it could've been scored either way.

[RubenSonny]

I guarantee that if a poll were to be made on the subject in this section Hopkins would win by landslide.

[Toney616]

I said you were contradicting yourself by saying that Bhop should have been DQ'ed and was fouling since you earlier said we can only go with whats official. You also bring up that he would've been DQ'ed with another ref the same thing can be said about judging perhaps if there were different judges it could be done differently. The official outcome of the fight doesn't change what happened in the ring and thats why I always go with who I fought won.

I think you are missing my point. There are a number of Hopkins wins, which I feel should be classed as dq losses. When I evaluate his resume will I class those wins as losses? The answer is no. Which brings us to Hopkins Calzaghe, how can a guy lose a fight controversially when he is using every foul in the book to win? He was throwing a right hand lead/counter, charging in with his head and holding. His fouls, clinching as a form of strategy, allowed him to stay in the fight, other wise he would of been flat out overwhelmed by Calzaghe's workrate.

Hopkins wasn't prime for that fight and very old its common sense that you put on some weight when your older as this always happens in boxing it doesn't neccesarily make him the bigger man.

He hooked up with Mackie Shilstone and put on 10 lbs of muscle. As a general rule when fighters refuse to take the unofficial weigh it its because they don't want people to realize how big a size advantage they are going to have come fight night. I reckon he was at least around 185 lbs against Calzaghe, so I have no problem believing Jack Leow. Either way he was at least 9lbs (2 divisions) heavier come fight night

JMM has said to weigh 145 lbs on fight night making the difference between him and Floyd not that much, but its not as simple as that since it was old man fat.

Floyd refused to weigh in come fight night against jmm, as a guess I reckon Floyd was around 160 lbs. So that's a big difference

Juan Laporte didn't get stopped by Sanchez doesn't make him better than Gomez, thats all conjecture on your part anyway. Better chin does not always mean better fighter.

True
But Kessler beat Froch and I think he could also beat Abraham and maybe even Pavlik. Same for Eubank

And Hopkins resume at 160 is greater than Calzaghes at 168.

Hopkins best wins at 160 are: Holmes, Echols I, Echols II and Tito
Calzaghes best wins at 168 are: Lacy, Kessler, Eubank
Neither of their wins were against elite opponents. Throw in the fact that Hopkins lost to the best mw's he faced:Taylor I, Taylor II and Jones and their resumes are about even

Hopkins original choice of opponent is irrelevant especially when Calzaghe fought Jones even further along than that.

It shows his a cherry-picker. And Hopkins turned down the legendary Danny Green to face a even more shot version of Jones.

Calzaghe was closer to his prime and it could've been scored either way.

I guess me, the hbo team, 2 of the 3 judges and the majority of the live crowd have to disagree with you on that one

2008-04-19 173 Bernard Hopkins 173 48-4-1

Thomas & Mack Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States W SD 12 12

referee: Joe Cortez | judge: Ted Gimza 115-112 | judge: Adalaide Byrd 113-114 | judge: Chuck Giampa 116-111
Calzaghe down in the 1st.

[Toney616]

I guarantee that if a poll were to be made on the subject in this section Hopkins would win by landslide.

That could just mean there are more Hopkins fans here, than Calzaghe fans.
I bet you most of the people who post in that thread wouldn't even try to explain there choice either

[IIIX JACK XIII]

As much as i dislike calzaghe, i gotta give him this one.

[StarshipTrooper]

That could just mean there are more Hopkins fans here, than Calzaghe fans.
I bet you most of the people who post in that thread wouldn't even try to explain there choice either

It just means the only peeps voting for Calslappy are nuthugging Brits.

Poet

[Toney616]

It just means the only peeps voting for Calslappy are nuthugging Brits.

Poet

lmao
Calzaghes resume=a bit of a mess
Hopkins resume=Overrated

[SNAKE GRIFFIN]

I think Dawson is that talented if he had that killer instinct he would be the best.

Me too its very frustrating to see a guy with his talent just go through the motions, I think the Pascal fight woke a sleeping dragon though.

[RubenSonny]

I think you are missing my point. There are a number of Hopkins wins, which I feel should be classed as dq losses. When I evaluate his resume will I class those wins as losses? The answer is no. Which brings us to Hopkins Calzaghe, how can a guy lose a fight controversially when he is using every foul in the book to win? He was throwing a right hand lead/counter, charging in with his head and holding. His fouls, clinching as a form of strategy, allowed him to stay in the fight, other wise he would of been flat out overwhelmed by Calzaghe's workrate.

Okay then, but I'm still gonna do it my way since it still wouldn't change what happened in the ring a fighter makes themselves great, not judges. I call it controversial because many people thought Hopkins deserved the nod, being that your best win is controversial doesn't say much for your resume, especially when it was against an old man. I couldn't give a **** about dirty fighting.

He hooked up with Mackie Shilstone and put on 10 lbs of muscle. As a general rule when fighters refuse to take the unofficial weigh it its because they don't want people to realize how big a size advantage they are going to have come fight night. I reckon he was at least around 185 lbs against Calzaghe, so I have no problem believing Jack Leow. Either way he was at least 9lbs (2 divisions) heavier come fight night

You have no problem believing Leow because you hate Hopkins, and my point about being old man weight still stands, but you will just ignore that.

Floyd refused to weigh in come fight night against jmm, as a guess I reckon Floyd was around 160 lbs. So that's a big difference

It doesn't matter if you think its a big difference or not, lets jsut say he was 160, those numbers wouldn't truly represent the size difference if you don't consider the age of Marquez.

True
But Kessler beat Froch and I think he could also beat Abraham and maybe even Pavlik. Same for Eubank

Conjecture.

Hopkins best wins at 160 are: Holmes, Echols I, Echols II and Tito
Calzaghes best wins at 168 are: Lacy, Kessler, Eubank
Neither of their wins were against elite opponents. Throw in the fact that Hopkins lost to the best mw's he faced:Taylor I, Taylor II and Jones and their resumes are about even

Tito can be considered elite, throw in the fact that Eubank wasn't ranked, Hopkins beat way more top 10 ranked competition and Hopkins age we have a landslide

It shows his a cherry-picker. And Hopkins turned down the legendary Danny Green to face a even more shot version of Jones.

Being a cherry picker doesn't have anything to do with anything, i go by who he beat. The rest is just reaching.

I guess me, the hbo team, 2 of the 3 judges and the majority of the live crowd have to disagree with you on that one

Playing dumb.....

That could just mean there are more Hopkins fans here, than Calzaghe fans.
I bet you most of the people who post in that thread wouldn't even try to explain there choice either

Then don't make it a poll and let people discuss it, I guarantee that every respectable poster will argue for Hopkins without a shadow of a doubt.

[Pastrano]

Wats dis Hopkins-nuthuggery, its skullduggery! Just my little rap.