Calzaghe vs Hopkins looking back

[boxing_fan2011]

Looking back on that fight what do you think it means to Calzaghes legacy? at the time everyone thought Hopkins was past it,but performances since then would make you think again.

I've picked holes in Calzaghes resume as much as anyone but this might go down as a great victory.

Would the result have been much different if it happened say 8 years ago?

[Terrel]

8 years ago Hopkins would have won it IMO.

In the later rounds of the Calzaghe fight Hopkins seemed to slow down and started having problems which wouldn't have happened 8 years ago.

On the other hand, a high work rate would always give Hopkins style some problems. A younger, fresher Hopkins takes it though by maybe 2 rounds.

[IMDAZED]

Looking back on that fight what do you think it means to Calzaghes legacy? at the time everyone thought Hopkins was past it,but performances since then would make you think again.

I've picked holes in Calzaghes resume as much as anyone but this might go down as a great victory.

Would the result have been much different if it happened say 8 years ago?

The result may have been different if there was a rematch. I think this win is far and away the best on Calzaghe's resume and stamps his status as a great fighter of our time. But there should have been a rematch and yes, the resume is sorta gaping. But you can't discount this win.

[jrosales13]

IMO the Hopkins win certifies him as a sure fire first ballot HOF'er. But, I still think he falls short of ATG status.

[Larry the boss]

lets you know how special joe really was man..time to give him his credit

[Allucard]

Looking back on that fight what do you think it means to Calzaghes legacy? at the time everyone thought Hopkins was past it,but performances since then would make you think again.

I've picked holes in Calzaghes resume as much as anyone but this might go down as a great victory.

Would the result have been much different if it happened say 8 years ago?

Won a split decision, which many thought he lost, taking advantage of old Bernard not being able to deal with a fast pace. Not very impressed.

[Larry the boss]

Won a split decision, which many thought he lost, taking advantage of old Bernard not being able to deal with a fast pace. Not very impressed.

give credit where its due..joe was not young himself man

[War-Robbo]

Joe was a great fighter, the best british fighter i have seen in my lifetime. Him and Bernard will go down as greats of the sport....

[Rosseboi]

Won a split decision, which many thought he lost, taking advantage of old Bernard not being able to deal with a fast pace. Not very impressed.

And yet boxing fans forget time and time again that version of Hopkins was much more experienced than the Hopkins that beat DLH.

People think 'prime' is purely physical that's so far from the true its unreal. Boxing is every bit mental as it is physical it's about having experienced a style that makes you a better fighter.

It can be argued Taylor beat a near prime Hopkins but if you asked me whether the Hopkins of Pascal II fought Taylor in his prime again who i thought would win I'd pick that Hopkins.

People use the 'age' argument as a means of discrediting Calzaghe.

[elgu]

Hopkins right now is 80% of what he used to be...im not impressed by how easily he was tagged and hurt in both the Pascal(and don't say he got hit because he wanted to open up more to get the decision, he got hit cause his reflexes are not the same

Against Calzaghe, Hopkins was about 85% of what he used to be but he couldnt keep up with with Calzaghe becuase his stamina was not enough(if the fight had been in 2001the story would have been different.

A prime Hopkins beats calzaghe 7 rounds to 5 because calzaghe has atg skill even if he doesn't have the resume.