I'm sorry, but Calzaghe defeated Hopkins comfortably

[abadger]

I know its old news, but as a Calzaghe fan who has to witness threads and posters disparaging Joe on a regular basis, including many people basically claiming that Hopkins won the fight, I feel I have to point out that the Hopkins-Calzaghe fight, far from being close, was a clear and comfortable Joe Calzaghe victory. In the immediate aftermath of the fight, I wasn't so sure, but after watching again it is so obvious that it is almost ridiculous, I believe that I, and many posters here fell prey to exactly the same thing that Joe did in the first two rounds of the fight, Joe gave Hopkins too much respect, and I and other Calzaghe fans have been giving too much repect to the wishful thinking of Hopkins fans and US posters.

The reality of the fight is that Joe Calzaghe harried Hopkins around the ring all night long, like nobody has ever done before, he threw more, landed more and was generally the dominant force, and you don't need compubox to tell it to you, you only need your eyes. Nobody, ever, has chased Hopkins around throwing punches at him and forcing him to fight like Calzaghe did, not even Roy Jones. Those of you who make the claim that Hopkins 'landed the cleaner harder shots' are just falling prey to wishful thinking, the truth is that it was the other way around.

I actually can't believe that I didn't have the balls to post this before, but as a relatively new poster I felt that I shouldn't be too critical of the voices that I felt were surely more experienced than me. Now I realise that although I am not the world's foremost boxing expert, my reading of the Hopkins fight is more accurate than the denial of the truth that is frankly rife on these boards. Joe Calzaghe is a fighter of the highest quality, and although Hopkins showed a lot against him, Joe did what what he always does, which is outclass his opponent comfortably. All of you who don't believe me, wait, and I mean wait, until Joe takes on Jones, Pavlik or Tarver. When that happens he will do exactly the same thing, and all of us Calzaghe fans will be proved right once again, as we consistently have been.

[feed-the-goat]

he won it easily in my book as well

[Burner]

Who the **** still cares about Calzaghe-Hopkins??

[abadger]

Who the **** still cares about Calzaghe-Hopkins??

Truly, I wouldn't even bring it up unless my daily experience of these boards did not include a huge number of posters like yourself saying that 1) Calzaghe is not a great fighter and 2) Hopkins won. If people don't want to hear this sort of thing from Calzaghe fans like myself then they ought to 1) recognise Calzaghe for the fighter he is and 2) admit that he beat Hopkins.

Simple.

[Burner]

Truly, I wouldn't even bring it up unless my daily experience of these boards did not include a huge number of posters like yourself saying that 1) Calzaghe is not a great fighter and 2) Hopkins won. If people don't want to hear this sort of thing from Calzaghe fans like myself then they ought to 1) recognise Calzaghe for the fighter he is and 2) admit that he beat Hopkins.

Simple.

No..Calzagheis not a good fighter and will be forgotten the second he retires.

Hopkins..Trinidada..Jones...Toney.....will never be forgotten.

Sorry.

I had Hopkins 114-113...Hopkins made Joe look like a prospect.....Hopkins was 7 years shy of fifty...what th uck does beating a 43 year old Hopkins mean??...****.

And now Calzaghe wants a 40 year old Roy....ugh.

[tyson]

I know its old news, but as a Calzaghe fan who has to witness threads and posters disparaging Joe on a regular basis,
including many people basically claiming that Hopkins won the fight, I feel I have to point out that the Hopkins-Calzaghe fight, far from being close, was a clear and comfortable Joe Calzaghe victory. In the immediate aftermath of the fight, I wasn't so sure, but after watching again it is so obvious that it is almost ridiculous, I believe that I, and many posters here fell prey to exactly the same thing that Joe did in the first two rounds of the fight, Joe gave Hopkins too much respect, and I and other Calzaghe fans have been giving too much repect to the wishful thinking of Hopkins fans and US posters.

The reality of the fight is that Joe Calzaghe harried Hopkins around the ring all night long, like nobody has ever done before, he threw more, landed more and was generally the dominant force, and you don't need compubox to tell it to you, you only need your eyes. Nobody, ever, has chased Hopkins around throwing punches at him and forcing him to fight like Calzaghe did, not even Roy Jones. Those of you who make the claim that Hopkins 'landed the cleaner harder shots' are just falling prey to wishful thinking, the truth is that it was the other way around.

I actually can't believe that I didn't have the balls to post this before, but as a relatively new poster I felt that I shouldn't be too critical of the voices that I felt were surely more experienced than me. Now I realise that although I am not the world's foremost boxing expert, my reading of the Hopkins fight is more accurate than the denial of the truth that is frankly rife on these boards. Joe Calzaghe is a fighter of the highest quality, and although Hopkins showed a lot against him, Joe did what what he always does, which is outclass his opponent comfortably. All of you who don't believe me, wait, and I mean wait, until Joe takes on Jones, Pavlik or Tarver. When that happens he will do exactly the same thing, and all of us Calzaghe fans will be proved right once again, as we consistently have been.

As a Calzaghe fan you think that you have the correct analysis of the fight, and you feel Calzaghe won. Surprise surprise.

The highlighted part about Roy Jones turned me off.

[Drunk Punch]

No..Calzagheis not a good fighter and will be forgotten the second he retires.

Hopkins..Trinidada..Jones...Toney.....will never be forgotten.

Sorry.

I had Hopkins 114-113...Hopkins made Joe look like a prospect.....Hopkins was 7 years shy of fifty...what th uck does beating a 43 year old Hopkins mean??...****.

And now Calzaghe wants a 40 year old Roy....ugh.

So if he beat Pavlik impressively would you then recognise his talent?

[abadger]

As a Calzaghe fan you think that you have the correct analysis of the fight, and you feel Calzaghe won. Surprise surprise.

The highlighted part about Roy Jones turned me off.

I'm glad you posted Tyson, because you always have something interesting to say. As regards Jones I don't deny that Jones actually beat Hopkins more clearly, Jones dominated their fight more crisply than Calzaghe did, but what I said about the manner of Calzaghe victory remains true. Jones did not pressurise Hopkins the way that Joe did, it was much more of a boxing chess match, in which Jones allowed his natural skill to win the fight on the cards almost by default, whereas Calzaghe, because he had to, took the fight to Hopkins really quite aggressively, which is why I admire him so much.

In retrospect do you really, really believe that Hopkins beat Calzaghe? I'm not sure of your opinion on this and I find it hard to believe that you actually do.

Also please don't take me for an idiot, when I mentioned Jones v Hopkins I am not straight up saying that Calzaghe's victory was more impressive than Jones', when I compared the two and said that not even Jones did what Calzaghe did, I was talking about the manner in which he did it, not the value of the eventual outcome.

[abadger]

No..Calzagheis not a good fighter and will be forgotten the second he retires.

Hopkins..Trinidada..Jones...Toney.....will never be forgotten.

Sorry.

I had Hopkins 114-113...Hopkins made Joe look like a prospect.....Hopkins was 7 years shy of fifty...what th uck does beating a 43 year old Hopkins mean??...****.

And now Calzaghe wants a 40 year old Roy....ugh.

Burner, I sometimes find it hard to take you seriously. In reality you contribute very little to discussing boxing of any kind, you seem to confine yourself to saying that the top US fighters are huge stars and that Calzaghe isn't fit to lace their shoes. You never offer any justification for this, other than your own opinion, and that is the opposite of intelligent debate, it is just trolling.

[tyson]

I'm glad you posted Tyson, because you always have something interesting to say. As regards Jones I don't deny that Jones actually beat Hopkins more clearly, Jones dominated their fight more crisply than Calzaghe did, but what I said about the manner of Calzaghe victory remains true. Jones did not pressurise Hopkins the way that Joe did, it was much more of a boxing chess match, in which Jones allowed his natural skill to win the fight on the cards almost by default, whereas Calzaghe, because he had to, took the fight to Hopkins really quite aggressively, which is why I admire him so much.

In retrospect do you really, really believe that Hopkins beat Calzaghe? I'm not sure of your opinion on this and I find it hard to believe that you actually do.

Also please don't take me for an idiot, when I mentioned Jones v Hopkins I am not straight up saying that Calzaghe's victory was more impressive than Jones', when I compared the two and said that not even Jones did what Calzaghe did, I was talking about the manner in which he did it, not the value of the eventual outcome.

Comparing the two versions of Hopkins will disprove your point.

Hopkins was the aggressor against Jones. In fact, he was the bully and aggressor in most of his bouts until he was way past it and had to settle with a slower pace.

And Jones is no pressure fighter either, so comparing the manner of the two fights is pointless.

I have actually not seen the entire fight yet. I've seen the first 4 rounds.
This is partly because I'm in a period where I find boxing a little boring, and partly because I literally hate watching Calzaghe.
I can't stand the slaps, I get furious when I watch it

As a final note, Jones defeated Hopkins with one hand. I'd like to see Calzaghe try that.