I'm sorry, but Calzaghe defeated Hopkins comfortably

[Burner]

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

Yes...Ill give him a Pavlik win..thats a good win.

[Silencers]

I had Calzaghe winning by a few points, can't remember the exact score. He outworked Hopkins to win.

[abadger]

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.

Crikey, I thought that you would realise that just because I admire the way Calzaghe beat Hopkins, that doesn't mean that I'm disparaging the way Jones did. They both did it in different ways and as you say, one isn't better than the other. I was merely pointing out something that Calzaghe did that I thought was good.

As for you saying that you hate watching calzaghe, well, wow I'm surprised! I know for a fact you are one of the more intelligent posters here and I'm amazed you'd come out with something like that. I don't know if you have some rigid definition of what a fighter should be or something, but I promise you that Calzaghe is one of the most talented fighters we've seen in a long time, he can be unorthodox at times, and yes his style did look a bit lame against Hopkins, but all I can say is that you really should go back and look at the Kessler v Calzaghe fight again, amongst others, and you will quickly see what calzaghe at his best has going for him. In that fight he demonstrated incredible offensive and defensive skills, with clean, hard orthodox punching, as well as the unorthodox, off balance blows that you and many others deride as slaps. Watch the way in which Calzaghe switches up his defensive game in round 6 and then switches up his offense from that point on and you will quickly find lots to admire about him, I guarantee it.

[tyson]

Crikey, I thought that you would realise that just because I admire the way Calzaghe beat Hopkins, that doesn't mean that I'm disparaging the way Jones did. They both did it in different ways and as you say, one isn't better than the other. I was merely pointing out something that Calzaghe did that I thought was good.

As for you saying that you hate watching calzaghe, well, wow I'm surprised! I know for a fact you are one of the more intelligent posters here and I'm amazed you'd come out with something like that. I don't know if you have some rigid definition of what a fighter should be or something, but I promise you that Calzaghe is one of the most talented fighters we've seen in a long time, he can be unorthodox at times, and yes his style did look a bit lame against Hopkins, but all I can say is that you really should go back and look at the Kessler v Calzaghe fight again, amongst others, and you will quickly see what calzaghe at his best has going for him. In that fight he demonstrated incredible offensive and defensive skills, with clean, hard orthodox punching, as well as the unorthodox, off balance blows that you and many others deride as slaps. Watch the way in which Calzaghe switches up his defensive game in round 6 and then switches up his offense from that point on and you will quickly find lots to admire about him, I guarantee it.

I have repeatedly stated that Calzaghe is one of the most impressive boxers out there.
It's bloody brilliant what he does and how he adapts to everything.

I just can't stand the ****ing slapping is all
Some fighters we like for no particular reason, others we don't.
For me, Calzaghe is the latter.

You said something in the line of "even Roy Jones didn't do that".
That sounded an awful lot like a comparison of the performances, by a Calzaghe fan.

I haven't seen anyone dispute that Roy defeated Hopkins, unlike the fight between Cal-Hop. That alone proves Jones did a more convincing fight, with one hand even.
But like I said, it is irrelevant due to the fact of styles makes fights.

I am not sure how coherent I come off as right now, but i'm dead tired. Been working all night

[abadger]

I have repeatedly stated that Calzaghe is one of the most impressive boxers out there.
It's bloody brilliant what he does and how he adapts to everything.

I just can't stand the ****ing slapping is all
Some fighters we like for no particular reason, others we don't.
For me, Calzaghe is the latter.

You said something in the line of "even Roy Jones didn't do that".
That sounded an awful lot like a comparison of the performances, by a Calzaghe fan.

I haven't seen anyone dispute that Roy defeated Hopkins, unlike the fight between Cal-Hop. That alone proves Jones did a more convincing fight, with one hand even.
But like I said, it is irrelevant due to the fact of styles makes fights.

I am not sure how coherent I come off as right now, but i'm dead tired. Been working all night

It's all good man, I, it appears have actually given up sleep!

[Vladimir303]

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.

Calzaghe won by a hair. A old man competed on defense and no offense with Joe Calzaghe......Willie Pep style.

If he only was just little more prime, he would have beaten Sloppy Joe.

Unfortunately for Hopkins, after beating Tarver he has been Delahoya-esque inactive and being in his 40's doesn't help either even if you are a gym rat.

In my book, Hopkins is the better fighter. And that's all I got to say about that.

[audibleone]

Although it wasn't pretty or even very professional, Calzaghe deservingly got the nod. His work rate was too much to ignore regardless of the lack of technique or even clean hitting. If Hopkins would had thrown more or landed more, it would had easily been his, but there was not much to choose from.

[abadger]

Calzaghe won by a hair. A old man competed on defense and no offense with Joe Calzaghe......Willie Pep style.

If he only was just little more prime, he would have beaten Sloppy Joe.

Unfortunately for Hopkins, after beating Tarver he has been Delahoya-esque inactive and being in his 40's doesn't help either even if you are a gym rat.

In my book, Hopkins is the better fighter. And that's all I got to say about that.

Nope. I thought Joe won by a hair the first time I saw it, but that was only because I was ****ting myself that he would lose. Honestly Joe beat him hands down, very impressively.

Hopkins wasn't really that much different than he has always been, definitely not that much different than the one that fought Tarver and Winky, the difference was Joe. Watch the fight again and look how much Calzaghe forced the fight and ask yourself if anyone, ever, was able to do that to Hopkins before.

[Vladimir303]

Nope. I thought Joe won by a hair the first time I saw it, but that was only because I was ****ting myself that he would lose. Honestly Joe beat him hands down, very impressively.

There was nothing impressive about it. I never like Joe's style. He looks like a ***** fighting his way out of spider webs even if it's effective. Hopkins made him look even more ugly. Had Bernard's old arms not worn out he would have beaten Joe.

Hopkins wasn't really that much different than he has always been, definitely not that much different than the one that fought Tarver and Winky, the difference was Joe. Watch the fight again and look how much Calzaghe forced the fight and ask yourself if anyone, ever, was able to do that to Hopkins before.

That's your lil view and I disagree. Hopkins lost something and slided downhill further since the Tarver fight. Anybody who says differently is not gonna convince me no matter what they say.

[abadger]

There was nothing impressive about it. I never like Joe's style. He looks like a ***** fighting his way out of spider webs even if it's effective. Hopkins made him look even more ugly. Had Bernard's old arms not worn out he would have beaten Joe.



That's your lil view and I disagree. Hopkins lost something and slided downhill further since the Tarver fight. Anybody who says differently is not gonna convince me no matter what they say.

Fair enough, no-one here can be convinced away from their true opinions. The only thing i would try to say is that for a long time now Hopkins has had the benefit of seemingly always being able to box a tactical cagey, slow paced fight. Against Calzaghe (and to a lesser extent Taylor, to whom he also lost) he did not have that luxury and he lost. His inability to fight that type of fight was completely down to what Joe Calzaghe did. I really believe if you watch the fight again you will be a lot more impressed with Joe Calzaghe.