is Calzaghe a better fighter than B Hop or not

[ßringer]

Well...he won, so technically speaking, you pretty much have to consider him the "better" fighter, at least on that night. There are alot of things Hopkins is good at, but beating Calzaghe wasn't one of them. It was fairly obvious that Hopkins knew if he engaged Calzaghe he wouldn't win, which is why he chose the method he did, and it was probably his best chance at beating someone with Joe's work rate and handspeed...it just didn't work as well as he'd hoped. If HOpkins had hopened up more so he could land more shots, he'd have caught more as well, and I think it would've been a wider decision without any question.

Yeah, I know, Hopkins gave Pavlik a boxing lesson, but on top of being so stylistically different, Calzaghe would've done about the same thing to Pavlik that Hopkins did...has already, in fact...and yeah, I also know that none of the Zaggs haters here like to hear the name "Kessler", but Kessler is a much more complete technical boxer than Pavlik, and was handled by Calzaghe in about the same manner, though I have to say that I did actually give Kessler a couple of rounds, but again...he's more complete, technically, than Pavlik, so that's not so surprising. If you guys want to see how much better Kessler is than Pavlik, petition for a Kessler/Hopkins matchup in January.

I think that if Hopkins were able to keep up with Calzaghe's work rate, it'd be a great fight, and I just don't know how it'd go, honestly. It wouldn't be a blowout either way, I don't believe, but I'm also not convinced it would go either way for certain. I could flip a coin and take a guess, but why bother.

I completely agree with the bolded part.

But tell me, what has Kessler done since losing to Joe almost a year ago?

Kessler is nearing 30 years of age and the match people remember him most for is the one he lost.

[ßringer]

And what the hell did Kessler do to earn a shot at Hopkins? Man, be honest here. Kessler isn't fit to wash Bernard's boxer shorts.

[MELLY-MEL...]

no he's not!

[fightnews55]

Bhop is light years ahead of that slapper who as Bernard so eloquently put it "hits like my sister"

[GTL]

NO JC is not a better fighter..
Absolutely not..
Watch a prime Bhop he is an ATG..

U think JC will be remembered?
get the fluck outta here..

Bhop is better in every category prime wise..
The only reason Joe will make the hall of fame is the 21 defenses

But, almost any champ can beat weak opposition.. F UCK joe

[Silencers]

No, Hopkins is better.

[ßringer]

Goddamn it's good to see Hopkins getting his respect again.

Bhop is light years ahead of that slapper who as Bernard so eloquently put it "hits like my sister"

Bernard does have a way with words.

[mspiegelo]

....not in their primes, not now, not ever......

[Stickman]

I completely agree with the bolded part.

But tell me, what has Kessler done since losing to Joe almost a year ago?

Kessler is nearing 30 years of age and the match people remember him most for is the one he lost.

Kessler is in roughly he same boat as Lacy was after getting beaten so badly by Calzaghe, though not to the extent, certainly. Whether he'll ever amount to ****, I can't say. I'd like to think he will, but I'm not going to hold my breath. Maybe he'll step up soon, but right now, you're right...he hasn't done ****.

As for whether he deserves a shot at Hopkins...no, in my opinion he doesn't, but there are a couple of reasons this would be a good idea. Foremost is that he's sort of a Calzaghe measuring stick. If HOpkins can do as bad or worse to him as Calzaghe, then there's a good chance that Calzaghe will rematch HOpkins, in the event Joe beats RJJ. Even if he doesn't, it'll still make Calzaghe look like a dip****, which is, I think, Bernard's most fervent hope. Secondly...why does he need to "deserve" a shot at Hopkins? I can't count the number of underserving *******s that have been given title shots, much less a fight with an older, highly regarded boxer just coming off a great win. Not sure he needs to deserve it, just that both guys need to want it to happen. I'm sure it won't, but it'd be a decent fight, I think, and one Bernard could look fantastic in, if he comes into the ring with the same conditioning and mentality he did against Pavlik.

[Kid McCoy]

is Calzaghe a better fighter than B Hop or not ?Joe holds a very contentious win over a 43 year old Hopkins but who on the whole is the better fighter taking in totality of thier careers etc

i got Hopkins

The same 43 year old Hopkins who pulled out probably his best ever performance against Pavlik a week ago? There are threads all over this forum proclaiming Hopkins to be the best 40+ fighter ever, yet at the same time people are happy to dismiss Calzaghe's win over him, on the grounds of age. He was the best fighter in the world when he beat Tarver and Pavlik, but only lost to Taylor and Calzaghe because he was old and shot. You can't have it both ways. Calzaghe was hardly in his prime himself.

I thought Joe won handily, although Hopkins did his utmost to make it as hideous to watch as possible. Some of his antics that night were pathetic.

For those picking apart Calzaghe's resume, it's just as easy to do the same for Hopkins. As with Calzaghe, he only held one belt for most of his reign, unifying 5/6 years down the line. Best wins at 160 against Tito and Oscar, both coming up from lower divisions. Two attempts at Mercado, a lot of nondescript challengers... Andrew Council, William Bo James, Hakkar? Fought Allen about half a dozen times, etc.

That being said, I give Hopkins the edge overall, but imo they're a lot closer than some say.