Joe Calzaghe's 14th fight, weighing 172 lbs

[βetamax]

OK...yes B-Hop landed better shots than Joe, but quite simply he threw so very few of them that there is no way you could legitimately give him the fight. No doubt, Joe's punches did appear ineffective, mostly, but he DID land with some, more in fact, than Hopkins did. I totally understand the Hopkins won argument, it was a close fight, but really Joe won and deservedly so. I don't care abour compubox.

I've never had a problem with anyone scoring the fight for Calzaghe. I just get irritated when people seem to think it was a lopsided domination for Calzaghe. It comes down to personal preference and it's hard to say who's right and wrong. One could argue that 10 ineffective punches combined with a higher workrate is better then 3 clean, effective punches from the opponent or vise versa. I gave some rounds to Joe since I felt his workrate was the difference in an otherwise even round as far as punching, yet in others I gave the nod to Hopkins for clean punching.

My main point is that if you look at the action Hopkins was able to provide he got the better of Calzaghe. If he had age on his side he would have been able to level the workrate and in this case I feel it would have been a clear UD for Hopkins. I usually don't like to bring up "what if's" but in this case some people seem to point to this as proof that Calzaghe is/was a better fighter then Hopkins.

[abadger]

I've never had a problem with anyone scoring the fight for Calzaghe. I just get irritated when people seem to think it was a lopsided domination for Calzaghe. It comes down to personal preference and it's hard to say who's right and wrong. One could argue that 10 ineffective punches combined with a higher workrate is better then 3 clean, effective punches from the opponent or vise versa. I gave some rounds to Joe since I felt his workrate was the difference in an otherwise even round as far as punching, yet in others I gave the nod to Hopkins for clean punching.

My main point is that if you look at the action Hopkins was able to provide he got the better of Calzaghe. If he had age on his side he would have been able to level the workrate and in this case I feel it would have been a clear UD for Hopkins. I usually don't like to bring up "what if's" but in this case some people seem to point to this as proof that Calzaghe is/was a better fighter then Hopkins.

I totally understand what you are saying. For me, the Hopkins-Calzaghe fight was Hopkins's fight, not Calzaghe's. Not that Bernard won, he didn't, but no doubt, he was the first fighter ever to really force Calzaghe into a place he didn't want to be. If there was a single fight that proved Calzaghe was the better boxer, that one wasn't it. However, I don't agree with you. For me the only reason that Hopkins looked competitive was because his whole game in that instance was to spoil, which he did very successfully, but not well enough to win.

For proof that Calzaghe is/was better than Bernard you have to look at their whole careers. B-Hop was a good fighter for sure, but I don't think anyone would argue that he was extravagantly gifted. He has always made a virtue of making it tough for his opponent but has rarely, if ever dominated his man in the way Joe has throughout his career. For me, if B-Hop had actually tried to fight with calzaghe, he would have come off looking worse than he did. A lot of people focus on how bad Calzaghe looked, but in truth Hopkins looked even worse, no other opponent apart from Jones has ever made Bernard look so limited, and I think that would be the case whenever they fought. Simply, Calzaghe's game was too much for the Executioner, no matter how much you want to dress it up. People can say that Hopkins was old, but he always has been, the Bernard that fought Calzaghe was not that much different from the one that beat Winky and Tarver, but the difference is that he lost.

That is the reason why I find myself constantly posting that Calzaghe doesn't get the respect he deserves. Nobody ever did to calzaghe what Hopkins did, but nobody other than Jones ever did to Hopkins what calzaghe did, and calzaghe was the one that came out with the win. Joe didn't win because B-Hop was bad, he won because he was good, and I don't see it being different any time in their careers. Remember, Joe is 36 years old and long out of prime, Hopkins would never have been able to match him for workrate or aggression, no-one ever has, and even a prime bernard wouldn't come close. Prime for prime Calzaghe would do even better, put it this way, don't you think Calzaghe wishes that Bernard would have stod and fought with him more?