Bernard Hopkins was robbed in the Calzaghe fight ....Proof inside.

[King Ghidorah]

love can blind a person. calzaghe love can make them so blind that they walk off a cliff screaming work rate!!!!!!!!!!!

I never Zaghtards existed till I made this thread...

[Lead Cenobite]

This is true. Yet it still seems difficult to score a round to the guy going backwards, clinching, and hardly throwing a punch.

Yet i guess going strictly by the official scoring criteria, if that fighter throws 2 punches in a round, landing both cleanly, and his opponent throws 20 and only lands one, even though he is the aggressor, forcing the fight, applying pressure etc, the former fighter should win the round.

But is a horrible way to win a fight. But if those are the rules, i guess its difficult to argue against it.



Did u get those stats from compubox?

Those are the rules. Not sure why you are so hesitant to embrace the actual scoring criteria.


Also why is it horrible? it's the art of boxing. Making a guy try to hit you, hitting him and making him miss. That's classic boxing.

Ali used to do this. The difference is in this fighter Hopkins was doing it at a MUCH LOWER output than the classic boxer may have and a lot of his shots were very sneaky and hard to see until you slow the film down. But it's still smart boxing and essentially toying with you opponent.

Aggression and moving forward means nothing if you can't do anything with it. Forcing the fight, moving forward and being the agressor are a good way to get humliated by an outside classic boxer counterpuncher. this is something every good boxing gym teaches and it's boxing 101.

That's not to say doing those three things is bad. Moving forward,forcing the fight and being the aggressor works but you have to DO something with it:

Glen Johnson vs. Roy jones for example.

But forget KO's it can be done even in decisions:

Ward vs. Gatti 1.


There is a problem with a lot of Joe's fans (and modern fans): this idea that agression mean anything. not only does it not mean anything in a scoring sense but even in context of a fight just being agressive alone could get you beat up if you don't DO SOMETHING WITH IT.

This is where the criteria of EFFECTIVE AGGRESSION comes in. That covers the category in question (pushing the fight, controlling pace, being aggressive, moving forward). But it has to be effective : aka landing clean punches OR causing psychological damage that causes the other guy to lower his punch output SO HE NO LONGER LANDS ANYTHING.

[daggum]

No fight is exactly the same and its silly comparison because it has nothing to do with anything related to this fight. Hopkins was too inactive to win most rounds after the 3rd, its unbelievably arrogant to assume you know better when scoring that the majority of ppl who watched the fight and had Joe winning.

Most ppl think Joe won, the fight even if you think Hopkins did could never be considered a clear win for him and is 3 years old.........its time to move on and maybe dissect some real robberies like Campillo/Shumenov2, Huck/Lebedev, this Saturdays Diablo/Palacios

the scoring criteria in boxing never changes though. hatton came forward and threw more punches but he wasn't winning. mayweather outlanded him and shut him down with good defense. the calzaghe-hopkins fight was exactly the same cept hopkins got tired and lost most of the later rounds where as mayweather knocked hatton out. it's possible if the fight had gone to decision there would be many people shouting hatton was robbed you never know.

[ATG Fighter]

would you leave your door unlocked if you'd been robbed twice before? :laugh:

Still doesn't change the fact that the robber is the one in the wrong and not the one that got robbed. Logic is lost on some people

[Spray_resistant]

the scoring criteria in boxing never changes though. hatton came forward and threw more punches but he wasn't winning. mayweather outlanded him and shut him down with good defense. the calzaghe-hopkins fight was exactly the same cept hopkins got tired and lost most of the later rounds where as mayweather knocked hatton out. it's possible if the fight had gone to decision there would be many people shouting hatton was robbed you never know.

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

[daggum]

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

it was the same fight. maybe calzaghe made it look closer than hatton but it was the same fight from a scoring criteria perspective.

enzo told joe he needed a knockout to win between rounds 11 and 12.

calzaghe paced around the ring with his head down before the decision was read

after the decision was read "i kicked hopkins ass!"

[Lead Cenobite]

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

watch the videos posted

[King Ghidorah]

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

Theres also a large percetage of people that Mike Tyson was robbed of a KO in tha Buster Douglas fight.......But fact us he got the same amount of time to get as Tyson did....

[King Ghidorah]

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

Perception can cloud peoples judgement on what they're seeing....

[MARKBNLV]

Yeah only a small difference, it was far from any robbery and only a small % of ppl even think Bernard won.

We will see i am going to make a poll.