This needs 2 get clear'ed up.... About hopkins

**Roger Mellie** · 04-13-2009, 11:55 AM

Taylor-no.
Calzaghe-hard to say.

**mathed** · 04-13-2009, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by dde91

Most People in here that Are Hopkins Haters, say that Hopkins got whooped by Taylor and Calzaghe. But we all know he didn't get Whooped, and that the fights were all close, and a lot of people feel he should have got the decisions. Me personally feels Hopkins ten years ago, would have smashed Calzaghe and Taylor to a TKO. He was 40 years and Older when he got these loses, and it wasn't in his prime. He is more of a defensive wizard, when back then, he could do everything.

What im going to ask is do you really think Calzaghe and Taylor are better then B-Hop prime for Prime????

I like Calzaghe as a boxer, he is one of my favorites but I still think that B-Hop is the greatest of the past 20 years. So there you have it from the mouth of a Calslappy fan!!

**MANGLER** · 04-13-2009, 11:59 AM

'Most people?' Almost nobody but his haters think Bhop has truly lost since RJ beat him. And there's been many prime for prime threads that show him ownin these guys if they fought him in younger days.

**dde91** · 04-13-2009, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by mangler

'Most people?' Almost nobody but his haters think Bhop has truly lost since RJ beat him. And there's been many prime for prime threads that show him ownin these guys if they fought him in younger days.

Do you have the links?

**ИATAS** · 04-13-2009, 12:03 PM

Only the haters can say something like that, no one with a respectable opinion would say such ****** ****.

The fact is that Bernard Hopkins never took a beating in his 20 year career, never even been CUT says a lot. To fight Taylor, Tarver, Winky, Calzaghe and Pavlik all over the age of 40 is amazing. No way any fighter could go through that list of opponents undefeated. And the crazy thing is the fights he lost to Taylor/Calzaghe were tremendously close and could have easily been scored for hopkins.

I also find it funny that some, not all, of the hardcore calzaghe fans discredit hopkins saying he's a bum or he's not an all time great, discrediting his resume and career saying he never beat anyone, etc., but fail to realize that by doing so only makes calzaghe look bad, because after all he was dropped by hopkins and narrowly escaped with a split decision win in his worst performance of his career at the hands of a 43 year old!

**El Dominicano** · 04-13-2009, 12:05 PM

In my opinion, B-hop hasn't lost since 93

**Bushbaby** · 04-13-2009, 12:08 PM

It's crazy to hear people say Calzaghe owned him,he barely won,Taylor only won because Hopkins took to long to get rolling,a prime Hopkins dusts almost anyone between 160-174,based on his super ring smarts,he is truly a scientist of the sport,he can break down a boxers whole fighting genetics in that very fight!!

**MANGLER** · 04-13-2009, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by dde91

Do you have the links?

Just use the advanced search function homey, watch em pop up.

**UKBRAWLER** · 04-13-2009, 12:14 PM

Prime Hopkins would not beat JC........it would go to cards and JC workrate will be far more as it was in their recent fight. remember JC is not in prime at time of that fight and still obvioulsy outpointed Bhop.....fight was not close

This needs 2 get clear'ed up.... About hopkins