Comments Thread For: Photos: Bernard Hopkins, Joe Calzaghe Vegas Reunion

[Ravens Fan]

do you even know how boxing works? hbo was backing calzaghe because jones-calzaghe was a done deal on hbo ppv if calzaghe won. the entire crowd was for calzaghe and obviously influenced the judges. those were the real factors that decided the fight. not that it took place in vegas.

hopkins had no chance of ever getting a fair decision. look at the official scorecards. the judges were giving calzaghe rounds like 2, 3, and 10 when he was completely dominated in them. i'm not sure why you take the word of 3 incompetents they clearly have no idea how to score a fight yet you keep referencing them like they know what they are doing. they have proven to be totally incompetent or corrupt thus the official verdict doesn't mean squat.

So, now it went from being a bad decision, in your mind, to a huge conspiracy that everyone was in on except Byrd. Jeez guy you are really, really reaching. And I have to ask, are you one of those guys that wear tin foil hats so Big Brother can't hear your thoughts? And what is your opinion was there a second shooter on the grassy knoll?

[Mr. Invincible]

Sure, still doesn't change the fact that Hop's legacy destroys Calzaghe's.

Ok, so you basically agree your point is moot. Cool.

Joe is/was a better fighter and will still be an atg and hof'r. End of debate.

[WESS]

So, now it went from being a bad decision, in your mind, to a huge conspiracy that everyone was in on except Byrd. Jeez guy you are really, really reaching. And I have to ask, are you one of those guys that wear tin foil hats so Big Brother can't hear your thoughts? And what is your opinion was there a second shooter on the grassy knoll?

No ******. My point is, Hops legacy destroys Calzaghe's. HOF? Sure, he held a title in his backyard for 10 years. ATG? Maybe in Wales.....

Carry on.

[Ravens Fan]

No ******. My point is, Hops legacy destroys Calzaghe's. HOF? Sure, he held a title in his backyard for 10 years. ATG? Maybe in Wales.....

Carry on.

Are you just looking for an argument? Because I was not even talking to you. So, who is the ******?

[WESS]

Are you just looking for an argument? Because I was not even talking to you. So, who is the ******?

That post was intended for the clown (Mr. Invincible) above your post. How you got the reply is beyond me.

[texasboi15]

Ok, so you basically agree your point is moot. Cool.

Joe is/was a better fighter and will still be an atg and hof'r. End of debate.

joe is the better fighter based on a controversial split decision? on paper, joe gets the nod. however, those who watched the fight, know the decision could have gone either way. some boxing experts even had hop winning. not taking anything away from joe. he is indeed a hall of fame all time great. but i wouldn't be rushed to say he is/was better than hopkins. a fellow poster recently asked an interesting question: could a 43 yr old joe calzaghe have dealt with a 36 yr old bernard hopkins?

[Mr. Philadel]

Hopins fans have the hardest time accepting his losses man its pathetic. Lol

Hopkins haters has a hard time giving him his props...you would think you dudes would come in here and squash the beef yall have with the old man...but NO!!!...you dudes just flame on...smh...one of my big bros told me that beef is only good if you're in the burger business....let it go!!!

[Mr. Philadel]

Hop: My legacy destroys your "legacy"....

Joe "but I beat you at your finest, landed more on you than any other fighter ever and made you fake injury to avoid being stopped".

......"Oh, and I'm a white boy".

fake a injury to avoid being stopped?!?!?........mofo please!!!

[Ravens Fan]

Hopkins haters has a hard time giving him his props...you would think you dudes would come in here and squash the beef yall have with the old man...but NO!!!...you dudes just flame on...smh...one of my big bros told me that beef is only good if you're in the burger business....let it go!!!

I understand this was not directed at me but I feel a need to reply. I don't see many posters on this thread that are real Bhop haters, I should speak for myself, I'm not a Bhop hater. I understand that Bhop was and still is a great fighter and his legacy is much better than Joe's simply because he fought the better fighters. But, at the end of the day Joe still beat him and there is nothing that anyone can do to change that fact.

[Mr. Invincible]

joe is the better fighter based on a controversial split decision? on paper, joe gets the nod. however, those who watched the fight, know the decision could have gone either way. some boxing experts even had hop winning. not taking anything away from joe. he is indeed a hall of fame all time great. but i wouldn't be rushed to say he is/was better than hopkins. a fellow poster recently asked an interesting question: could a 43 yr old joe calzaghe have dealt with a 36 yr old bernard hopkins?

You are reading into it a little more than necessary. Hops is a late bloomer, as has been proven. He faced Joe while still on top and lost straight up. Ledderman has it 111-116 for Joe.

The judges scored it for Joe, so yes in a head to head comparison, there's no debate who was better because Joe proved it.

End of story.