The real difference between Bore Hard and The Blow's competition...

[dakster]

i dont buy this old eubank thing myself tbh, eubanks took the fight with calz at very short notice, he had been in training for a light heavy and had to drain to make the calz fight which might have been a factor in the final outcome.

With eubanks experience and joes inexperience, i think the " old " term evened the fight, plus 31 is hardly over the hill, calz himself is way past that age.

Imo the win over eubanks was an amazing win for calz, eubank had a chin of granite yet calz managed to knock him down, calz himself proved he has an amazing chin, eubanks caught him a couple of times yet the whiskers stood the test. lets be in no doubt eubank could **** a bit.

Calz has said a couple of times that eubank gave him the toughest fight of his life, whilst eubank has conceeded that joe was the proper article.


like i say i think eubanks is a notch on joes resume, joe was 25 eubanks 31.

i cant really agree with people who bandy about that eubanks was old and infer he was past it, making joes win less credible.


in comparing some of the would be atgs that hopkins has fought and has been credited for, tito oscar, i think eubanks was a stellar win for joe at that time. imagine joe called out osar or tito when hopkins fought them, we would think joe was taking the piss, we all know the blow would blow them away, complete mismatches, yet ppl claim these as remarkable wins for hopkins, a natural light heavy hopkins at that.


Now breathe lol.

[RichCCFC]

i dont buy this old eubank thing myself tbh, eubanks took the fight with calz at very short notice, he had been in training for a light heavy and had to drain to make the calz fight which might have been a factor in the final outcome.

With eubanks experience and joes inexperience, i think the " old " term evened the fight, plus 31 is hardly over the hill, calz himself is way past that age.

Imo the win over eubanks was an amazing win for calz, eubank had a chin of granite yet calz managed to knock him down, calz himself proved he has an amazing chin, eubanks caught him a couple of times yet the whiskers stood the test. lets be in no doubt eubank could **** a bit.

Calz has said a couple of times that eubank gave him the toughest fight of his life, whilst eubank has conceeded that joe was the proper article.


like i say i think eubanks is a notch on joes resume, joe was 25 eubanks 31.

i cant really agree with people who bandy about that eubanks was old and infer he was past it, making joes win less credible.


in comparing some of the would be atgs that hopkins has fought and has been credited for, tito oscar, i think eubanks was a stellar win for joe at that time. imagine joe called out osar or tito when hopkins fought them, we would think joe was taking the piss, we all know the blow would blow them away, complete mismatches, yet ppl claim these as remarkable wins for hopkins, a natural light heavy hopkins at that.


Now breathe lol.

Agreed.

31 old? WTF!

[Derranged]

You bow down to the genius, son.

Yea, you're ****in brilliant. How many alts is that now??

[Duke McKenzie]

Yea, you're ****in brilliant. How many alts is that now??

Watch your sass or I'll slap that ***** out of your mouth.

[Derranged]

Watch your sass or I'll slap that ***** out of your mouth.

Oh Im really scared now. You sure showed me.. Threating over the internet. What are you like 15 years old?

[Duke_McKenzie]

Oh Im really scared now. You sure showed me.. Threating over the internet. What are you like 15 years old?

You need to chill out, slag, I was only messin' around with ya. Jesus.

[nmuburner22]

"The Blow".......yeah his resume blows.

[Duke_McKenzie]

"The Blow".......yeah his resume blows.

What a witty fellow you are.

[THe TRiNiTY]

What I don't get is this. He's the champion, he's in a unification tourney and Tito is, too. Tito happens to advance and all of a sudden, it's somehow less than appropriate that they fought. He fought who advanced. That's what a champion and tourney contestant is supposed to do.

Then, DE LA HOYA decides to move up. It's not like Hopkins called him out. OSCAR wants to move up, to chase history, and Hopkins says.. "**** it, there's money and he did technically get a win." He fights him, does what he's supposed to do, and people once again fault Hopkins. He fights Taylor, gets robbed and then all of a sudden, he's exposed. That was a lose-lose fight, ANYWAY. If he beat him, like he DID in the first fight, Taylor wasn't that good to begin with.

I'm not saying who has had the better opposition, because that's essentially all opinion. And quite frankly, I don't give a ****. Fact of the matter is, we'll find out who's better at this particular point and time. BEST thing we can get to comparing their primes is when they actually fight. Neither is in his prime, but it's the best we get. Both ruled their divisions, both have/had close to 2 dozen defenses. Went for long stretches undefeated (one, still being undefeated) and are world class fighters.

Let's hope, realistically, for a DECENT fight.

[warp1432]

That's it exactly... The Blow makes people into bums.

Dwiens, like I said, his comp isn't STELLAR, but those who say it's just half a dozen names (and even then I'm being generous around here) are doing him a disservice.

But let's be fair here, both of them just have average resumes.

I'm not taking anything away from Calzaghe because I like watching him, but Hopkins has decent fighters on his resume too. They aren't great by any means, but I think Hopkins resume you could recongize more names on it then Calzaghes. Is it because they are American? Maybe, but they were also decent. I mean you give Hopkins crap for fighting Robert Allen 3 times, but the blow fought Mario Veit two times. Sure he KOd him twice,but Bhop blew
Allen out the second time and the only reason they fought a thrid was because he was a ****** mandatory and Hopkins played the safe game so he could fight Oscar De La Hoya for sure.



You can't blame Hopkins for fighting Trinidad or De La Hoya since they were fighting at 154 the majority of the time and Trinidad fit perfectly at 160. De La Hoya could be argued about not fiting in at 160, but not Trinidad.

The "Well Tarver was overrated and he ****** anyway" is pretty ****** to be honest. It's like saying that about Kessler, which I would never because both Tarver and Kessler are pretty good.

Calzaghe has some good names, as does Hopkins, but the majority of the title defenses the main competition was average. To be honest, I think Hopkins competetion are better then Calzaghe's, though I don't think people should discredit Hopkins or Calzaghe for their resumes because they have some great names on them also.

edit: Oh by the way, Happy Birthday Anorak. Or was it yesterday? Anyway Happy birthday.