If Hopkins / Calzaghe rematched ...

[Roger Mellie]

damn straight

Damn wrong,more like. He lost the first fight fair and square.

[boxasmash]

Hopkins without 10 minute break, decucted points for holding and no 2 point head start = easy Calzaghe win.

[Roger Mellie]

Hopkins without 10 minute break, decucted points for holding and no 2 point head start = easy Calzaghe win.

You forget the low blows from hopkins as well,all the well through the fight,you know,the ones that JC didnt complain about and got on with the fight.

[Walterson]

Hopkins without 10 minute break, decucted points for holding and no 2 point head start = easy Calzaghe win.

Hopkins without a near one year layoff, tune up, improved stamina (similar to the way he prepared for pavlik) and no Roach but Nazim = Hopkins split decision or Calzaghe KO.

[Walterson]

You forget the low blows from hopkins as well,all the well through the fight,you know,the ones that JC didnt complain about and got on with the fight.

JC was loving it that's why.

[boxasmash]

Why Hopkins lost?

- first up, he came off a near year layoff without a tune up fight.

- i think Roach is a great trainer at times but sometimes the fighter he has makes him look better than he should (i.e. Pacquiao). The gameplan for Calzaghe was wrong, Hopkins went for the body too much. He wouldn't do next time.

- It was an off night for him, why would he then go ahead to throw more punches in the Pavlik fight, seems like (cough) somebodies stamina has gone up.

- A lot of people are pretty blind, and technique hugely outweighs sloppy workrate. If you throw a 100 punches you should be aiming to connect more than 75% not less than 25%. Hopkins slipped and dogded more than 75% of Calzaghes shots. Yet, Calzaghe is rewarded for throwing wild punches yet Hopkins nothing for dodging and slipping. I rate dodging and slipping much more highly than aggressiveness.

a rematch?

- many here state that Joe would win again at a much wider decision due to throwing more. Where were the 1000 punches in the first fight, seems like someones game plan got disrupted.

- Hopkins would up his workrate, that's all he would need. With Nazim as his right hand man.

Calzaghe knows it himself that he would clearly lose in a rematch. Why would he offer Jones a rematch and not Hopkins, quite clear to me

What a load of biased bull ****.

When did he offer Jones a rematch?

Calzaghe fought at 175 for the first time, in USA for the first time, with a ****ty reff who wouldn't break the holding and gave Hopkins a 10 minute rest. How would Hopkins up his workrate without getting stopped from exhaustion?

[boxasmash]

And since when did Nazim become the best trainer in the world? Because of the Mosley win? Nazim didn't even give Hopkins the stratergy to beat Pavlik it was John David Jackson, what would Nazim tell Hopkins which is so special?

[Roger Mellie]

And since when did Nazim become the best trainer in the world? Because of the Mosley win? Nazim didn't even give Hopkins the stratergy to beat Pavlik it was John David Jackson, what would Nazim tell Hopkins which is so special?

This is true,and he happens to be a very good trainer himself.

[Walterson]

What a load of biased bull ****.

When did he offer Jones a rematch?

Calzaghe fought at 175 for the first time, in USA for the first time, with a ****ty reff who wouldn't break the holding and gave Hopkins a 10 minute rest. How would Hopkins up his workrate without getting stopped from exhaustion?

Biased bull **** or the real truth.

Your eyes deceive you.

A rematch was in place if it was a competitive fight - details below.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/oth...ch-Boxing.html

How wouldn't he not up his workrate? If his stamina let him down the first time round but still managed to give him a controversial lost. Then i'm sure this would be one of the weaknesses he would work on for a rematch. Hence, his higher workrate in the Pavlik fight.

Take you opinions somewhere where they are accepted, bring some facts to the table.

No one said Nazim was the best trainer in the world. Where did you hear that?

You need to take a breather.

[Kris Silver]

Why Hopkins lost?

- first up, he came off a near year layoff without a tune up fight.

- i think Roach is a great trainer at times but sometimes the fighter he has makes him look better than he should (i.e. Pacquiao). The gameplan for Calzaghe was wrong, Hopkins went for the body too much. He wouldn't do next time.

He beat the best LHW with a 6 months off boxing entirely, and although some time did pass afterwardst Winky Wright is hardly a tune up, he'd recently drawn with the guy whom beat him twice.

Roach is a great trainer, and so to Richardson, but I don't think there's enough differences there to believe a re match would be different, in-fact it's rarely used as an excuse which makes the whole thing look excuseful again. Roach is a strong tactician. What would going to Joe's chin or head more done exactly, he was on the move a lot and Nard was slowing him down a little with the body shots.

- It was an off night for him, why would he then go ahead to throw more punches in the Pavlik fight, seems like (cough) somebodies stamina has gone up.

- A lot of people are pretty blind, and technique hugely outweighs sloppy workrate. If you aim to throw a 1000 punches you should be aiming to connect more than 75% not less than 25%. Hopkins slipped and dogded more than 75% of Calzaghes shots. Yet, Calzaghe is rewarded for throwing wild punches yet Hopkins nothing for dodging and slipping. I rate dodging and slipping much more highly than aggressiveness.

The same reason Calzaghe threw way more punches in his other fights, and Pavlik through less in the Hopkins fight for eg. The other guy was neatralising and/or wearing the other guy out, plus often out of range. Throwing 1000 punchs you should be aiming for 75% hitting? Are you serious, that's an insanely high pct and would be an anilation. Calzaghe sometimes reaches 1000 and here 700, not a huge dip considering. Hopkins was nearly 500, not that bad. Whilst Calzaghes pct wasn't great, it's hardly surprising given Hopkins being so good defensively and on the run. He still had a higher pct than Hopkins whom being more picky you'd actually expect more accuracy, though not the case. Calzaghe also landed more on Hopkins than anyone ever has.

Hopkins was being constantly pressed, swarmed with punches and was on the run. With Kelly throwing a lot less and with a low pct, Hopkins was still avoiding his punches by just moving slowly away from his right hand and getting the distance right. Completely different amounts of cardio needed in both those fights.

a rematch?

- many here state that Joe would win again at a much wider decision due to throwing more. Where were the 1000 punches in the first fight, seems like someones game plan got disrupted.

- Hopkins would up his workrate, that's all he would need. With Nazim as his right hand man.

Calzaghe knows it himself that he would clearly lose in a rematch. Why would he offer Jones a rematch and not Hopkins, quite clear to me

So Hopkins makes Calzaghe throw even less in a re match? How? How does he throw and land loads more when his pct was lower in the first fight and he was being a little more picky? The fact is he can't keep up with Calzaghes speed or work rate, to avoid enough punches, or land enough of his own.

A coming forwards Hopkins is exactly what Calzaghe would want, and would be Hopkins giving away his best tactical weapon of neatralising Calzaghe, being defensive and not engaging, all things Joe doesn't like.

Calzaghe does not know it himself and that's ridiculous. He'd have re matched either of the two had he have lost. As is often the case for a loser, they want a re match. He didn't lose to either, he retired as planned still later than originally intended. Job done, a few more fans, a few more haters.