Why do Calzaghe fans deny, lie and distort information.

[larryx]

i wouldnt voted hopkins except hopkins kicked his ass//kessler is a joke who has no major wins on his resume in a weak super middle weight divivsion

[ALT-Assassin]

If you truly believe this it shows just how biased you really are. Noone takes Hopkins to school.

You should of highlighted the low blow part as well because the replay clearly showed Calzaghe punching low.Any boxer with half a brain would milk the opportunity to take a rest,especially a 43 year old boxer.

[BKM-]

Well, being that Hopkins actually won that fight, I'd say Kessler is in fact his best win.

[them_apples]

You are a fat yank who knows nothing of boxers that don't go on HBO.

Why don't all these amazing euro boxers cross the ocean and own up then?

Oh that's right, It's because they suck and lose. Calzaghe is just lucky his debut in the USA was against a 43 year old man who almost beat him.

Hatton, who actually has the balls to fight a Prime fighter get's kOed.

don't automatically assume everyone is a yank ether buddy

[Flawless.]

1. Going into the Kessler fight many so called boxing experts thought Calzaghe was going to lose to the much younger Champion just like they did with Lacy and like Lacy, JC had a decisive victory. 2 Hopkins was expected to lose to Calzaghe and he clearly did, but it was ugly since Cortez let Hop fight dirty. JC took Hopkins to school in the second half of the fight and age had nothing to do with it. Hop was able to finish strong against Taylor twice, Tarver and Winky, but had trouble with Calzaghe's pace and movement so he had to pretend to be hurt from a low blow to buy time to escape the pressure and rythym JC was getting.

1 A lot of people thought Hopkins was going to win.
2 Re watch the fight it was extremely close. I never knew being knocked down first round is called schooling.
3 Or was his stamina just low and need time to regroup not JC pressue

[Dan...]

Kessler was SMW number 2. Hopkins was light weight number one and a lot of people thought Hopkins was going to win. You don’t judge a fighter by what people think but what they have done. Hopkins fight was a lot Closer and why are you making excuses for Kessler. Hopkins had a better record coming into the fight and his status was higher.

I am simply saying that I don't think Hopkins had too much left going into the fight against Joe. I am not making excuses for anybody, I don't need to. Hopkins managed to make the fight competitive by scoringa flash KD and using his knowledge and experience to spoil Calzaghe. After the KD he didn't do a great deal defensively. Kessler on the other hand has great power and is **** in his prime. He was looking very impressive going into that fight and I thought Joe had to fight at his absolute peak to overcome him. Basically, as I said, I think Kessler presented the more significant competitive challenge to Calzaghe and is therefore his best win.

[Flawless.]

Let me ask you this. Fighters are based on their merit and what they have achieved. Hopkins coming into the fight beat Winky and Tarver while Kessler come into beating no names. How is Kessler the better win when Hopkins gave a harder fight and was in the p4p list when Kessler wasn’t? Kessler IS A GOOD BOXER BUT HE IS UNPROVEN.

[ALT-Assassin]

Why don't all these amazing euro boxers cross the ocean and own up then?

Oh that's right, It's because they suck and lose. Calzaghe is just lucky his debut in the USA was against a 43 year old man who almost beat him.

Hatton, who actually has the balls to fight a Prime fighter get's kOed.

don't automatically assume everyone is a yank ether buddy

shut up you fat yank

[Dan...]

Let me ask you this. Fighters are based on their merit and what they have achieved. Hopkins coming into the fight beat Winky and Tarver while Kessler come into beating no names. How is Kessler the better win when Hopkins gave a harder fight and was in the p4p list when Kessler wasn’t? Kessler IS A GOOD BOXER BUT HE IS UNPROVEN.

The circumstances at the time of the fight also need to be considered though. Ok, if the argument is restricted purely to resume and accomplishments then it is obviously Hopkins 5 times over, but the argument should not be restricted to this. Kessler was coming off several impressive victories and was in his prime whilst Hopkins is now nearly an old man who struggles to throw more than 10 punches a round. This needs to be considered.

[them_apples]

Let me ask you this. Fighters are based on their merit and what they have achieved. Hopkins coming into the fight beat Winky and Tarver while Kessler come into beating no names. How is Kessler the better win when Hopkins gave a harder fight and was in the p4p list when Kessler wasn’t? Kessler IS A GOOD BOXER BUT HE IS UNPROVEN.

Once again I agree, the brits once again just thought Kessler was better because of his "0" but really, Hopkins even at 43 was leagues better than that bum Kessler who beat nobodies.


Calzaghe lost to Hopkins btw, thats why he was making excuses after the fight saying "I didn't fight my best" BS he just sucks.