b-hop vs calslappy fair decision? or not?

[UKDan]

too many of these threads now....joe won the fight...most people do agree joe won the fight....i supported joe in that fight but im not saying he won because of that...compubox recorded joe landed more punches on bhop than in any of bhops other fights! i thought joe clearly won (doesnt matter if theyre slaps aslong as they land!

[Oriachim]

Bhopkins wasn't landing enough punches to win the fight, he was picking his shots carefully while calzaghe was just.. not. Like most of my friends kostyatszyu44, people seem to think rounds are won on how powerful punches are. Sure bernard was throwing some crippling punches, but he wasn't throwing near enough punches. I thought it was a UD to calzaghe not a SD.

[abadger]

joe was outclassed, it was close but he was

most of the time he charged in wildly b-hop just nailed him with a short right or tied him up

b-hop dropped him also, and there were many other times he showed how open joe is when he flies in with his little slaps

he never had b-hop hurt, and at no one time was b-hop looking subpar or slopy, but joe certainly was looking poor

joe made it close with his constant attack and b-hop admittedly didnt throw enough to firmly secure the win but b-hop should have won a close decision IMO

either that or a draw which i can accept

The problem with your account of the fight is that the only part of it that describes Hopkins doing anything to win is the initial part where you talk about him hitting Joe with rights. The rest is just criticism of Calzaghe's style.

The simple fact is that Hopkins did not throw or land anything like enough of those rights to win. Not even close to enough. You can land the better shots, which Hopkins did, but if they come at a rate of less than one per round, you cannot win. Simple.

[KostyaTszyu44]

The problem with your account of the fight is that the only part of it that describes Hopkins doing anything to win is the initial part where you talk about him hitting Joe with rights. The rest is just criticism of Calzaghe's style.

The simple fact is that Hopkins did not throw or land anything like enough of those rights to win. Not even close to enough. You can land the better shots, which Hopkins did, but if they come at a rate of less than one per round, you cannot win. Simple.

ok thats a good criticism

yeah i did mention i thought b-hop didnt throw enough to fully cement a victory

but u have to admit, joe looked very ordinary in this fight, and he landed few significant shots which is a main reason why b-hop has an argument for winning

[Pugilistic™]

Although i felt Hopkins did enough to edge a victory, i can see how Calzaghe won the fight and there's no doubt that he deserved the decision. If Hopkins got the victory he would of deserved the decision also.

Calzaghe beat Hopkins on what he was supposed to win on..... his workrate. he wasn't landing cleanly and effectively but he was overwhelming Hopkins with his high workrate and that stopped Hopkins from throwing at times which was winning him rounds. The fight was close but you have to give Calzaghe credit for fighting Hopkins fight and winning.

[T-97]

Now, being serious. I scored it 114-113 Calzaghe, I don't think Hopkins did enough to win it.

Alt @ KT, I see your still holding your grudge against me and abadger with those fake quotes

[KostyaTszyu44]

Bhopkins wasn't landing enough punches to win the fight, he was picking his shots carefully while calzaghe was just.. not. Like most of my friends kostyatszyu44, people seem to think rounds are won on how powerful punches are. Sure bernard was throwing some crippling punches, but he wasn't throwing near enough punches. I thought it was a UD to calzaghe not a SD.

the better, crisper shots should mean more than a dozen slaps

and by slaps i dont mean punches that lack power but are still thrown with accuracy and good technique like malignaggi's shots, i mean shots that land with the inside of the glove or dont land cleanly

[abadger]

ok thats a good criticism

yeah i did mention i thought b-hop didnt throw enough to fully cement a victory

but u have to admit, joe looked very ordinary in this fight, and he landed few significant shots which is a main reason why b-hop has an argument for winning

Joe did not look good at all, and he did have trouble landing cleanly. Credit goes to B-Hop for making the fight look close, at his age it is little short of amazing.

[kayjay]

ok thats a good criticism

yeah i did mention i thought b-hop didnt throw enough to fully cement a victory

but u have to admit, joe looked very ordinary in this fight, and he landed few significant shots which is a main reason why b-hop has an argument for winning

You have to admit that Hopkins did not do enough to win the six rounds he needed. Maybe there were a few isolated moments when you thought he looked like he was 'pwning', but you don't judge fights based on stylistic preferences. A fighter actually needs to win the requisite number of rounds

[KostyaTszyu44]

ok fair criticism