What is the difference between Joe Calzaghe and Bernard Hopkins?

[scap]

Hopkins had no legacy before the Trinidad fight-just as Joe is being Critisized by Bozo for not having a major accomplishment on his record before Saturday night it took Hopkins even longer to get that notch on his belt.

Sure Bozo you can discredit Lacy all you want a week later but you thought Lacy was to win therfore I dont want to hear that he only beat the young and green Lacy. (hsut up too jujuy)

How oild was Hopkins when he beat Tito?

Which fighter on Bernard Hopkins resume pre-tito was one that you point to and say "damn thats a good win"...both Joe and Bernard have very similiar resumes...you act liek there were a ton of world beaters at 168 that Joe never fought? (if ottke is all you can come up with you need to quietly bow down)

Why didnt Nard challenge McCelellan or Lamar Parks? Why didnt Nard have the sack to fight at a catch weight and fight at 168 when 168 was really cooking? Why did he choose to stay in the very very poor middleweight division when things were lookin hot just 8 pounds away?

Pre-Tito what makes Nard's defence record better then Joe's-is your answer simply to discredit the WBO belt (they all are bull****), how long did it take Bernard to uinify?

Surely even you Bozo can see the similarities-but hinestly I want an answer to this questioon...Pre-Tito what makes Bernard's deenses stand out over Joe's? Cant wait to hear your reply!

[Dirt E Gomez]

That post made me laugh. It's entire premise is based around whether B-Hop would've been in the HOF if he hadn't fought Tito and Oscar essentially.... Altering reality for an argument means it's no argument at all.

[Crumble]

That post made me laugh. It's entire premise is based around whether B-Hop would've been in the HOF if he hadn't fought Tito and Oscar essentially.... Altering reality for an argument means it's no argument at all.

the argument is that their careers are similar especially now Joe has his career definer against Lacy (even though now people will say he was overhyped and too young and green even though he is 28), and its hard to dispute that, and you can discredit either fighter depending on your point of view.

[Dirt E Gomez]

the argument is that their careers are similar especially now Joe has his career definer against Lacy (even though now people will say he was overhyped and too young and green even though he is 28), and its hard to dispute that, and you can discredit either fighter depending on your point of view.

If that was B-Hop's career defining fight...he still went on to beat opponents (one easy HOF'er) for 4 years. Hence the reason comparing the two careers isn't fair to B-Hop. His career is over, except maybe 1 fight left. Calzaghe has just reached his height of his career, and it will be over within a handful of years. He has to get his **** together and be impressive or else you're acting as though Hopkins fights meant nothing post Trinidad.

[phil28]

If that was B-Hop's career defining fight...he still went on to beat opponents (one easy HOF'er) for 4 years. Hence the reason comparing the two careers isn't fair to B-Hop. His career is over, except maybe 1 fight left. Calzaghe has just reached his height of his career, and it will be over within a handful of years. He has to get his **** together and be impressive or else you're acting as though Hopkins fights meant nothing post Trinidad.

Oscar must be the guy you're talking about (the HOF'er after the Tito fight). Oscar won his first title at super feather, meaning Oscar had come up 5 weight divisions whilst Bhop had sat at 160.

Oscar is not a HOF'er for his achievements at middle weight (a disputed points win over Sturm).

[Dirt E Gomez]

Oscar must be the guy you're talking about (the HOF'er after the Tito fight). Oscar won his first title at super feather, meaning Oscar had come up 5 weight divisions whilst Bhop had sat at 160.

Oscar is not a HOF'er for his achievements at middle weight (a disputed points win over Sturm).

And Bozo made a good comparison earlier in this thread when he commented on how Hagler defeating Duran is comparible. Granted, ODLH isn't Duran, but in some aspects they're comparable... and this is one of em'. That is also you simply pointing out one part of my post... the not-so important part. Calzaghe has one thing going for HOF possibilities.... undefeated.... and that doesn't mean much if he hasn't unified, made bigger named fights, or cleaned the division.

[scap]

And Bozo made a good comparison earlier in this thread when he commented on how Hagler defeating Duran is comparible. Granted, ODLH isn't Duran, but in some aspects they're comparable... and this is one of em'. That is also you simply pointing out one part of my post... the not-so important part. Calzaghe has one thing going for HOF possibilities.... undefeated.... and that doesn't mean much if he hasn't unified, made bigger named fights, or cleaned the division.

Your right but where you and Bozo need to concede a bit is Bernard Hopkins pre-felix trinidad.

Pre Felix Joe and Bernard are very similar...its not like Bernard Hopkins grabbed his second belt a year after he won his first it took years and years and years to get it and when he did get it its not like he lifted it off of Roy Jones or Nigel Benn, he took it from Keith ****ing Holmes.

The point Im trying to make is that Pre-Tito Bernard had accomplished similar things to that of Joe Calzaghe and vice versa...are we gonna argue and say Nard's victory over Antwun Echols is head and shoulders above Joe's victory over Charles Brewer...if we do were a bunch of dip****s. (we may be disp****s regardless)

Both men are very comparable-sure Joe has a ways to go but to ignore the simlarities is to be pig headed, lets not be pig headed.

BTW-Juyjuy **** the **** up.

[Dirt E Gomez]

That is comparable... but the difference is B-Hop has done stuff since then, Joe just beat Lacy last weekend... So as I said, we'll see what he does from now.

[scap]

That is comparable... but the difference is B-Hop has done stuff since then, Joe just beat Lacy last weekend... So as I said, we'll see what he does from now.

Cant disagree with that!

Although he didnt do a ton post Tito-he fought more mediocre middlweights and then hit the jackpot when Oscar chose him to fight-Oscar has zero history in the middleweight division and will never fight there again-he had no business there so Im not one to give Nard full credit for this vicotry over a fading champion.

[mECHsLAVE]

That is comparable... but the difference is B-Hop has done stuff since then, Joe just beat Lacy last weekend... So as I said, we'll see what he does from now.

What has he done since then that is so great? DLH is really the only outstanding fighter he has beaten, but he was clearly at the wrong weight. DLH never even had a single legit win at 160. So I don't really even give Bernard much credit for that one.

And if you take away DLH, then his career reads pretty much the same post-Tito as pre-Tito. Joppy, Eastman, Allen- those guys are good fighters, sure, but they aren't any more spectacular than Reid, Sheika, Veit, or Mitchell. In fact, I'd say they were lesser fighters, p4p.

Good thread, scap. This is a good discussion.