What does it say about Calzaghe that fans give him credit for Hopkins's achievements?

[Boxing Goat]

I don't think he should get credit for Hopkins' achievements.

What I think is funny is how the impressions of the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight changed and were revised throughout time.

The initial line was that Calzaghe picked on a 42 year old man and would have never beaten him in his prime.

Then as Hopkins kept winning and beating younger guys, the theory was that Bernard was actually "robbed" in the fight and Calzaghe never actually beat him.

It's one of the biggest false controversies I've ever seen. The only controversy from that fight was how Hopkins was allowed to take two separate knees without being counted out.

I totally agree on this one. Hopkins had to feint injury to survive the fight due to Joe's workrate.

Those who think Joe lost should go back and try and find a round to give Hopkins in the second half of the fight. He didn't win **** from the 6th round on and had to have two breaks.

[hugh grant]

JC don't get credit for BHs wins, rather the BH win for JC was a great win considering BH is still winning.

People try make out JC was mugging an old age pensioner when he beat BH and that JC hasn't fought anyone?

Well all that JC fans are saying JC might not have a really in depth resume but he has a nice few signature wins, and BH is one of them.

[Mitchell Kane]

It does speak volumes.

It's also extremely ******ed.

What's even more so is when the question is beckoned "why does Taylor's legacy enhance every time Hopkins wins?"

The TS replies with "Taylor was knocked by Pavlik and Abraham"

What the hell does that matter?

I thought Hopkins won the Taylor rematch...but I also thought he lost to Calzaghe.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was very close...and Hopkins did seem to be aided by the whole "low blow" thing.

The argument some people make is that Hopkins was "old" when he lost to Calzaghe (there's some that also try and trot out the he was "green" when he lost to Jones Jr.)...so the win is diminished.

The extent to which it's diminished is what's argued about. Hopkins was indeed no longer in his prime, but he's still capable of winning world title bouts years after the fight.

Seems to be fair to say Calzaghe beat a good version of Hopkins, but not the best version.

[lets rumble]

Calzage was given a gift decision against Bhop any way !!!!!!!

[Boxing Goat]

JC don't get credit for BHs wins, rather the BH win for JC was a great win considering BH is still winning.

People try make out JC was mugging an old age pensioner when he beat BH and that JC hasn't fought anyone?

Well all that JC fans are saying JC might not have a really in depth resume but he has a nice few signature wins, and BH is one of them.

Yea as hindsight has now shown us, it was actually his best win.

[SnakeVen0m]

I say the opposite. It says more about Bernard cause he's still fighting while Joe is God knows where, probably bumping a line of coke off some skrippers ****.

If they were to step in the ring tomorrow. Bernard would wipe the floor with Joe at this age. What does that say about Joe since he's the younger of the two.

[Boxing Goat]

I thought Hopkins won the Taylor rematch...but I also thought he lost to Calzaghe.

Calzaghe-Hopkins was very close...and Hopkins did seem to be aided by the whole "low blow" thing.

The argument some people make is that Hopkins was "old" when he lost to Calzaghe (there's some that also try and trot out the he was "green" when he lost to Jones Jr.)...so the win is diminished.

The extent to which it's diminished is what's argued about. Hopkins was indeed no longer in his prime, but he's still capable of winning world title bouts years after the fight.

Seems to be fair to say Calzaghe beat a good version of Hopkins, but not the best version.

Great post. Extremely accurate and well thought out.

[I Love Jesus!]

Does it mean his resume is awful, or that his fans are just desperate and insecure? Or both?

I mean, you never hear Roy Jones's fans talking about Jones's legacy getting boosted because of what B-Hop is doing now, or when James Toney won FOTY in 2003 and in the eyes of everyone but some drunk judges, beat a HW contender in Sam Peter in 2006. Or Lewis's fans taking credit for Vitali's wins, or Sanders's fans talking about his legacy because of what Wald has done.

Pacquiao's fans didn't swell with pride when Erik Morales took 4 to 5 rounds against Maidana and later won another title. Floyd's fans didn't get happy when El Famoso and El Matador went on to win world titles, and his fans are among the worst in the sport.

Could it be that the fans of Corrie Sanders, who had one notable victory in his career, are less desperate to boost his resume than the fans of Joe Calzaghe, an undefeated first ballot HOFer, are?

Yeah its desperation I just made a similar post, They are pretty butthurt about joes legacy and the respect he doesn't get. He's just another otteke/Erdei type guy

[daggum]

The "robbery" claims are also humorous because then you ask the same group of people how they scored the fight and they'll say "114-113 Hopkins".....LOL so in theory both guys won the same number of rounds yet it was a "robbery".

Joe Calzaghe was robbed of KO victory.

well thats the closest possible score you could have in favor of calzaghe and that's being very generous. the rounds that people give him are usually the "well he did a little better in that round and hopkins didn't hit him that much so i guess i will give that round to calzaghe." if they looked at each round in a vacuum they wouldn't have that attitude and would score it wider for hopkins since he was doing all the clean punching and had the much better defense. coming forward and missing doesn't really mean anything when scoring boxing matches.

why couldn't he hit hopkins? because hopkins' defense was so good? advantage hopkins right? i mean defense is a scoring criteria while throwing punches and missing punches is not.

why wasn't calzaghe able to pin hopkins on the ropes even once during the fight? every time he tried hopkins countered him or avoided his punches easily and moved away. the few clean punches he did land were when they were in the center of the ring. otherwise he was just walking into punches and desperately flailing.

also calzaghe should have been dq'd since You cannot hit with an open glove, the inside of the glove, the wrist, the backhand, or the side of the hand and that's all he did during the fight from start to finish. so calzaghe broke the rules probably 500-600 times and still couldn't beat hopkins. imagine if he had to actually follow the rules and throw real punches? he would be a walking punch bag like shumenov and he knows it. throwing slappy punches with the side of the glove is the only thing that made him awkward because fighters don't train for punches coming from those angles since it's illegal.

[Boxing Goat]

I say the opposite. It says more about Bernard cause he's still fighting while Joe is God knows where, probably bumping a line of coke off some skrippers ****.

If they were to step in the ring tomorrow. Bernard would wipe the floor with Joe at this age. What does that say about Joe since he's the younger of the two.

The win when they were both active is all that matters.

If BHop had been retired for 5+ years and Calzaghe stayed active, Joe would be the one pulverizing Hopkins so it's all relative.