The test of greatness!!!

[BetterCallSaul]

I wanted to pit two great fighters against each other. To do this I have developed a fair system for scoring each fighters respective wins.

1 star fights will earn 1pt for a win
2 star fights will earn 2pts for a win
3 star fights will earn 3pts for a win

Any loss will mean -3pts

Draws and no contests will earn 0 pts

In my scoring system I have pitched two great fighters against each other. Hopkins and Calzaghe. I have tried to be as unbiased as possible and believe I have put each fighters opponents in the right classing system. But as always, it will be highly based on opinion.


Hopkins

Hopkins - Fights before world level = 23

22 Wins
1 Defeat

23pts - 3pts = 20pts

1 star fights - Richie, Hall, Wynn, Aquino, Mercado (2nd fight), Frank, Council, Brown, Allen (NC), Allen, Hakkar, Allen

11 Wins
1 No contest

11pts - 0pt = 11pts

2 star fights - Mercado(D), Lipsey, James, Jackson, Echolls, Vanderpool, Echolls, Holmes, Daniels, Joppy, Eastman,

10 Wins
1 Draw

20pts - 0pts = 20pts

3 star fights - Jones(Loss), Johnson, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Taylor(Loss), Taylor(Loss), Tarver, Wright, Calzaghe(Loss), Pavlik

6 Wins
4 Losses

18pts - 12pts = 6pts

Hopkins Overall Points = 57

Calzaghe

Calzaghe fights before world level = 22

22 Wins

22pts - 0pts = 22pts

1 star fights - Sobot, Ferreya, Thornberry, Starie, Woodhall, Veit, Mcintyre, Jiminez, Pudwill, Mkrtchian, Salem, Veit , Manfredo, Jones

14 Wins

14pts - 0pts = 14pts

2 star fights - Reid, Sheika, Brewer, Mitchell, Ashira, Lacy, Bika

7 Wins

14pts - 0pts = 14pts

3 star fights - Eubank, Kessler, Hopkins

3 Wins

9pts - 0pts = 9pts

Calzaghe Overall Points = 59

Hopkins Overall Points = 57

Calzaghe wins by split decison.

[hammerhiem]

Eastman and Joppy should be three star Wins. you also bazaarly took a point off here

11pts - 0pt = 10pts

[boxasmash]

i dont care what people say, calzaghe is and was always better than bernard hopkins.

[nathan_nall]

Thats actually pretty clever. Still, you are going to have arguments that your awarding of stars is biased. But, at least you did your research, fight by fight by fight... so you've done a hell of a job.

I agree with the Split Decision also... just not sure to who it should be given.

People are so polar when it comes to comparing the resume. The fact is, its hard as hell to compare the two because they are VERY SIMILAR. Loads of mandatories (usually B level fighters) and a few A level fighters. Joe's European resume is the mirror image of B-Hops American resume.

[BetterCallSaul]

Eastman and Joppy should be three star Wins.

As I say it's based on opinion. Try my system yourself if you can be bothered lol.

[dans]

thanks for wasting my time buddy.

[Ishy Aytan]

i dont care what people say, calzaghe is and was always better than bernard hopkins.

Because you have your tongue up his arse...

[BetterCallSaul]

thanks for wasting my time buddy.

Glad to waste your time.

At least my thread is better than the "OMG Pacman da best in galaxy" you come up with.

[nathan_nall]

thanks for wasting my time buddy.

He's at least trying to place some operational definitions into gaging their careers. It's a hell of a lot better than the tossing back and forth of opinions that's gone on for the last several months.

[S.G.]

it's slightly flawed

the 1 star opposition has too much sway in overall points

when in reality they count for virtually nothing compared to wins against the likes of Tarver and Trinidad

maybe 1 star = 1 point, 2 star = 3 points, 3 star = 5 points might result in more realitic end scores... or have 5 seperate "stars" of opponenets, worth 1 point each

there will always be flaws in a system like this in a sport like boxing... but i guess it's more reasonable than some of the unqualified nonsense you'll hear

i would never put Calzaghe's resume on the level of B-Hop's though