Did Calzaghe and Hopkins Legacies take a slight tumble tonight?

[daggum]

i think even calzaghe could have knocked over taylor in the 12th. wait for him to tire out for the first 11 then bam the old push him over. froch barely landed any punches and taylor still got winded. so sad.

[Welter_Skelter]

Did Calzaghe and Hopkins Legacies take a slight tumble tonight?

We all know styles make fights, but an average fighter like Froch disposing of a decent version of Taylor?

Calzaghes claim to fame is beating a guy who Taylor beat twice years earlier.

We all know styles make fights, but there is some truth in there in what I say...

Tonights result raises a small questionmark about both Joe and Hopkins.

Obviously Froch is Not average.. he is unorthodox stylistically ..But you can't argue with success .. and he laways finds a way to win.. this is not the 1st time he has lost over half a fight and won with a late stoppage..

[The_Visitation]

No, on both counts. The Taylor who lost tonight isn't the one that beat B-Hop at MW. Calzaghe obviously never fought either Taylor or Froch, and 'Froch > Taylor > B-Hop' is the same nonsense any any such claims usually are.

As Street Bully said, time to give Froch a little credit. Whatever his game may have, and whatever it may lack, there aren't many SMWs of recent years who could have avoided being beaten by him tonight.

[street bully]

By being his best win (an aged version) getting beaten years earlier by a guy who got beaten by a limited fighter in Froch.

Sure it wasn't the best version of Taylor but you have to ask questions about how good he really was.

What was Taylors record when he "beat" Hopkins? TBH Taylor isn't the same fighter no more. He is done on the big stage.

[ИATAS]

Come on, that's just ****** logic. When Hopkins fought Taylor he was young and hungry, Taylor was 22-0 with 17 KO's. He was 26 years old (he was 30 years old tonight). He already got KO'd by Pavlik then lost a decision to pavlik, who I remind you Hopkins destroyed so that in itself kills that same kind of logic. Jermaine Taylor is simply not the same young hungry lion he was 4-5 years ago and he is damaged goods mentally (lots of fighters NEVER fight the same after getting KO'd (see Roy Jones for example)).

[Hook]

Come on, that's just ****** logic. When Hopkins fought Taylor he was young and hungry, Taylor was 22-0 with 17 KO's. He was 26 years old (he was 30 years old tonight). He already got KO'd by Pavlik then lost a decision to pavlik, who I remind you Hopkins destroyed so that in itself kills that same kind of logic. Jermaine Taylor is simply not the same young hungry lion he was 4-5 years ago and he is damaged goods mentally (lots of fighters NEVER fight the same after getting KO'd (see Roy Jones for example)).

I see what your saying, but I think you can ask questions about how good taylor ever was. The guys only ever real claim to fame is beatign Hopkins.

No matter what you say that was a decent (perhaps not best), hungry version of Taylor out there tonight - he was by no means washed up. He fought very well for most the fight, it's not like he turned up a shadow of himself - Froch simply beat him down later on.

[-EX-]

No. Bernard still has his defenses and dominating wins over top fighters. Calzaghe has his 3 or 4 notable wins...

[daggum]

No. Bernard still has his defenses and dominating wins over top fighters. Calzaghe has his 3 or 4 notable wins...

3 or 4? more like 46 undefeated babayyyyyyy

[$partacus]

The loss is a negative mark on Taylors resume, which makes B-Hops resume slightly less impressive having lost to him twice. I understand what people are saying about Taylor being a different fighter etc but it does have an effect however small.

[Haglerwins]

It depends on the argument. What does the first Hopkins Taylor fight look like at 175 where Bernard wouldn't have to worry about conserving energy considering everything?