Hopkins game plan against Calzaghe....

[Ryn0]

I downloaded and rewatched the fight again just a few nights ago. I still scored it 114-113 for Hopkins. Hopkins clearly took the first 5 rounds IMO, and then he picked up another one, the 7th or 8th I think.

He landed the cleaner, more effective blows consistently. Joe adapted and was able to get his game going around the 6th, but he still was barely landing.

Hopkins held too much for my liking, but I could see why he was doing it. It was taking away from Joe's workrate.

To think what the outcome would've been had Hopkins not been suffering from his thyroid condition, and had dumbass Freddie Roach not been in Hopkins corner is something I do from time to time.

I say Hopkins took the the first 4 and lost the rest IMO maybe the 7th but I counted that as an even round.

Even then at 114-113 you can't count it as robbery (not saying you do just some people do) If Hopkins has a point deducted I wouldn't have moaned either he was doing alot of clinching and headbutting in that fight.

[warp1432]

When i watched the fight the first time round i thought Hopkins game plan was all wrong and flawed to bits but after watching the fight again i reckon he got it near enough spot on apart from the fake low blow which was unnecessary. The way he went about his business was about the only way anyone could beat Calzaghe.

He neutralised Calzaghe more then Calzaghe neutralized him and nearly pulled it off. He made Calzaghe look **** and landed the better shots IMO.

A rematch would be very interesting the more i think about it. Hopkins has the tools to do it IMO.

I think he could have held and then when countered followed it up with combos of his own. Instead he threw only a right hand lead, but wanted to conserve stamina probably.

I still think Hopkins beat him, but Hopkins rough tactics gameplan was the theory on how to beat Calzaghe. People who complain about Hopkins' tactics need to get used to it and it's a common part of the sport. Berto and Collazo's ref was terrible.

[ßringer]

First 5 rounds.. In a row?

C'mon man, no way.

Way. Seriously, watch it again with no bias whatsoever. The 5th round was the only toss-up but I still gave it to Hopkins based on effective blows. Joe literally landed next to nothing until the 5th.

[ßringer]

I say Hopkins took the the first 4 and lost the rest IMO maybe the 7th but I counted that as an even round.

Even then at 114-113 you can't count it as robbery (not saying you do just some people do) If Hopkins has a point deducted I wouldn't have moaned either he was doing alot of clinching and headbutting in that fight.

I never said it was a robbery. It was way to close to call a robbery. It was almost as close as Pacman/Marquez 2. Anybody with a non bias point of view can see that.

All this 117-111 **** for Joe is crap. It was a much closer fight than that.

[hookoutofhell]

If you watch the fight you can see Calzaghe was hiting him with very precise punches in the second half of the fight,clean left hands.He arguably won the last 6.

there was someone who posted a while back who said that they were some rounds that were clearly zaghes and some rounds that were clearly hopkins. but even if you scored the swing rounds for hopkins you still only came in at 114-113, and that if you scored the swing rounds for zaghe then the fight came to 116-112. i had it 115-112 for joe.

yes bernard did land some clean punches and he did a fairly good job of neutralizing the output but as he was doing that he seemed so concerned about zaghes offence that he barely mustered togther any real combos himself.

he threw the odd clean punch here or there but like i sid he was so concerned abot spoiling zaghes fight that he forgot about trying to win it himself!!

as for joe no he wasn't at his best in the fight but he still grinded out the W against a spoiler who still has alot left in the tank.

joe managed to take away hopkins best punch from round 4 onwards and made sure bernard didn't land the counter right, joe had adapted and was taking control. hopkins then tried to disrupt his rhytm by faking the low blow, again a foul move that is more concerned about slowing calzaghe rather than mounting his own attack.

[j.razor]

I agree that his gameplan was a good one I just think he faded too much in the late rounds and didn't have enough output.

This is what hopkins always does - he tries to take away his opponents best weapon and use it against them. With Pavlik he took away his jab and wouldn't allow him to set up. With Calzaghe he stated his best weapon was his output, which he did successfully take away - calzaghe threw about 50% less then he normally does. Problem was hopkins didn't throw enough himself, mainly I believe cuz he fatigued (possibly becaues of his thyroid problem but that's another story) late.

If a rematch ever happens I would imagine hopkins being much more aggressive.

Hopkins didnt throw as many as joke calslappy but he landed jus as many & were clearly harder...that shows how much better Hopkins is...

[Chunk..]

If you watch the fight you can see Calzaghe was hiting him with very precise punches in the second half of the fight,clean left hands.He arguably won the last 6.

I don't agree with that at all but i respect your opinion so fair play. Like Dynamite Kid said, age eventually caught up with him but to beat a Joe Calzaghe, he went about it the right way IMO.

[ßringer]

People who complain about Hopkins' tactics need to get used to it and it's a common part of the sport. Berto and Collazo's ref was terrible.

Quoted for truth. Hopkins is merely a clever, old school fighter. With clever, old school tricks of the trade. Hitting a man in a clinch on the opposite side of the referee is not ilegal, leading with your head is not illegal, etc....

Some of the old school guys were much dirtier. They're rub their gloves in a man's cuts, put chemicals on their glves to blind their opponet, etc....

Ricky Hatton is a much dirtier fighter than Hopkins IMO. And yet nobody says **** about him.

[Dynamite Kid]

there was someone who posted a while back who said that they were some rounds that were clearly zaghes and some rounds that were clearly hopkins. but even if you scored the swing rounds for hopkins you still only came in at 114-113, and that if you scored the swing rounds for zaghe then the fight came to 116-112. i had it 115-112 for joe.

yes bernard did land some clean punches and he did a fairly good job of neutralizing the output but as he was doing that he seemed so concerned about zaghes offence that he barely mustered togther any real combos himself.

he threw the odd clean punch here or there but like i sid he was so concerned abot spoiling zaghes fight that he forgot about trying to win it himself!!

as for joe no he wasn't at his best in the fight but he still grinded out the W against a spoiler who still has alot left in the tank.

joe managed to take away hopkins best punch from round 4 onwards and made sure bernard didn't land the counter right, joe had adapted and was taking control. hopkins then tried to disrupt his rhytm by faking the low blow, again a foul move that is more concerned about slowing calzaghe rather than mounting his own attack.

Joe didn't grind out ****. You have to land punches to win a Boxing match....... Its kinda the fundamentals of the sport.

Joe got the decision thats all

[warp1432]

Way. Seriously, watch it again with no bias whatsoever. The 5th round was the only toss-up but I still gave it to Hopkins based on effective blows. Joe literally landed next to nothing until the 5th.

Thought Calzaghe managed to take rounds 2 and 4. Rounds 1 and 3 are mixed up because when scoring live I messed up scoring the first round, so the next round Hopkins won, I scored 10-8 to make up for it.

edit: Oh and I thought Pacquiao-Marquez 2 was much clearer for Marquez then this bout was for Hopkins.