Bernard Hopkins took calculated risks, he is 1 of the most overrated modern ATG

[IMDAZED]

you didnt follow him, admit it and move on.....tell me what Im revising? that I prefered he fight Calzaghe and his style was tougher for him than tarver? were they not one weight apart for years? Was calzaghe not a titleholder since 1997?

moving on bro, its not my fault you didnt know who calzaghe was in 2006 or before then

GGG is a paper champion, its not stopping people from drooling over him and wanting to see him fight people from 154-175....moving on

Man come on, you're better than this. It's like you can't just admit you're way off smh.

First of all, Calzaghe's belt wasn't even considered "legit" back then. It was like a spruced up version of today's IBO. He had never fought outside of Europe and Hopkins barely had a name in the USA. I mean, why the hell would they fight? Because years later you have the benefit of recognizing that both fighters were future HOF'ers who eventually clashed? Who the hell was calling for a match between the two? Oh that's right, you were. While everyone else wanted to see Hops versus the other champs in the division and the same for Calzaghe since Sven Ottke was considered by many to be the best fighter in the division.

[therealpugilist]

Man come on, you're better than this. It's like you can't just admit you're way off smh.

First of all, Calzaghe's belt wasn't even considered "legit" back then. It was like a spruced up version of today's IBO. He had never fought outside of Europe and Hopkins barely had a name in the USA. I mean, why the hell would they fight? Because years later you have the benefit of recognizing that both fighters were future HOF'ers who eventually clashed? Who the hell was calling for a match between the two? Oh that's right, you were. While everyone else wanted to see Hops versus the other champs in the division and the same for Calzaghe since Sven Ottke was considered by many to be the best fighter in the division.

wbo isnt legit now IMO....Its the fighters that make the belts, the belts dont make the fighters

when I was on east side b0xing years ago, americans and brits talked about who would win between calzaghe, jones, and Hopkins all time because all 3 were the best at 160, 168, and 175.



look at GGG unified champion, 3 belts....then you look a little closer, the MFer didnt even fight for 2 of them so, how important are the belts if he aint fighting for them?

like i said if you didnt follow him or know who he was, cool. dont try to tell me what I wanted to see and what I discussed with other fans

moving on.......Hopkins is a great fighter but highly overrated tactically....great technique, but he benefitted from calculated risks, fighting certain styles that favored him, couldnt adjust to other styles and staying at 160 when it was horrible

[-PBP-]

......so fighting an undefeated world champion, one weight class up is pointless....ok

He wasn't a ****ing champion!! The belt was not recognized as a legitimate world title until 2007. It was basically like the IBO title back then.

On top of that, how are you going to call Calzaghe a "world champion"...and get this (oh you contradicting ass MF), not recognize Hopkins title defenses because he was not the "lineal champion" until he beat Trindiad. OMG dude. You said this!!! You said it!!!!

3) Title defenses....newflash...Hopkins defended the unified/lineal title only 6 times and the ibf 20 times.....He holds the record for most defenses of a major title belt....carlos monzon holds the record for world's middleweight champion title defenses at 14.....2 totally different things

Come on man. Are we going by lineal titles or paper titles? Calzaghe didn't win the lineal title until he beat Lacy.

you can flip it, dip it, how ever you want but I wanted to see Hopkins vs Calzaghe more than I wanted to see Tarver back then and thought it would be a better fight than Tarver, I wasnt very high on him because he was inconsistent...moving on

No you weren't. You weren't even watching boxing back then. You want to see it in hindsight since you know how good Calzaghe's career turned out. Joe Calzaghe before he fought Jeff Lacy is EVERYTHING YOU HATE ABOUT BOXING.


I mean stop it dude. This thread is laughable. Just admit it.

1. You said Hopkins took calculated risks.

2. He took a major risk by moving up 2 weight divisions to fight the LINEAL champion at 175.

3. You forgot he did that and had a "oh shit" moment.

4. So instead of saying "OK. I was wrong. He took risks." You make some of the most outlandish comments in NSB history/

You're actually trying to argue that Hopkins fighting for an unrecognized paper title in 2006 was a more respectable move than fighting the LINEAL champion at 175. After you CONSTANTLY argue how the LINEAL CHAMPIONSHIP IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS.

This is thread is outrageous.

[IMDAZED]

wbo isnt legit now IMO....Its the fighters that make the belts, the belts dont make the fighters

when I was on east side b0xing years ago, americans and brits talked about who would win between calzaghe, jones, and Hopkins all time because all 3 were the best at 160, 168, and 175.



look at GGG unified champion, 3 belts....then you look a little closer, the MFer didnt even fight for 2 of them so, how important are the belts if he aint fighting for them?

like i said if you didnt follow him or know who he was, cool. dont try to tell me what I wanted to see and what I discussed with other fans

moving on.......Hopkins is a great fighter but highly overrated tactically....great technique, but he benefitted from calculated risks, fighting certain styles that favored him, couldnt adjust to other styles and staying at 160 when it was horrible

In what year were you guys discussing this on ********boxing? Back in Hopkins' prime (97-2000/2001)? No. Maybe in 2001.

LOL @ if I didn't follow him or know who he was. I followed Calzaghe from his title winning effort until his retirement. I picked him to beat Lacy. I thought he was a good fighter but he was a very inconsistent champion early on and no one, NO ONE, was calling for a fight between him and Hopkins then.

[therealpugilist]

He wasn't a ****ing champion!! The belt was not recognized as a legitimate world title until 2007. It was basically like the IBO title back then.

On top of that, how are you going to call Calzaghe a "world champion"...and get this (oh you contradicting ass MF), not recognize Hopkins title defenses because he was not the "lineal champion" until he beat Trindiad. OMG dude. You said this!!! You said it!!!!



Come on man. Are we going by lineal titles or paper titles? Calzaghe didn't win the lineal title until he beat Lacy.



No you weren't. You weren't even watching boxing back then. You want to see it in hindsight since you know how good Calzaghe's career turned out. Joe Calzaghe before he fought Jeff Lacy is EVERYTHING YOU HATE ABOUT BOXING.


I mean stop it dude. This thread is laughable. Just admit it.

1. You said Hopkins took calculated risks.

2. He took a major risk by moving up 2 weight divisions to fight the LINEAL champion at 175.

3. You forgot he did that and had a "oh shit" moment.

4. So instead of saying "OK. I was wrong. He took risks." You make some of the most outlandish comments in NSB history/

You're actually trying to argue that Hopkins fighting for an unrecognized paper title in 2006 was a more respectable move than fighting the LINEAL champion at 175. After you CONSTANTLY argue how the LINEAL CHAMPIONSHIP IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS.

This is thread is outrageous.

blah blah, you dont agree with me...cool...moving on man

[IMDAZED]

He wasn't a ****ing champion!! The belt was not recognized as a legitimate world title until 2007. It was basically like the IBO title back then.

On top of that, how are you going to call Calzaghe a "world champion"...and get this (oh you contradicting ass MF), not recognize Hopkins title defenses because he was not the "lineal champion" until he beat Trindiad. OMG dude. You said this!!! You said it!!!!



Come on man. Are we going by lineal titles or paper titles? Calzaghe didn't win the lineal title until he beat Lacy.



No you weren't. You weren't even watching boxing back then. You want to see it in hindsight since you know how good Calzaghe's career turned out. Joe Calzaghe before he fought Jeff Lacy is EVERYTHING YOU HATE ABOUT BOXING.


I mean stop it dude. This thread is laughable. Just admit it.

1. You said Hopkins took calculated risks.

2. He took a major risk by moving up 2 weight divisions to fight the LINEAL champion at 175.

3. You forgot he did that and had a "oh shit" moment.

4. So instead of saying "OK. I was wrong. He took risks." You make some of the most outlandish comments in NSB history/

You're actually trying to argue that Hopkins fighting for an unrecognized paper title in 2006 was a more respectable move than fighting the LINEAL champion at 175. After you CONSTANTLY argue how the LINEAL CHAMPIONSHIP IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS.

This is thread is outrageous.

He's not hearing you because he can't own up to the fact that he's just wrong.

[therealpugilist]

In what year were you guys discussing this on ********boxing? Back in Hopkins' prime (97-2000/2001)? No. Maybe in 2001.

LOL @ if I didn't follow him or know who he was. I followed Calzaghe from his title winning effort until his retirement. I picked him to beat Lacy. I thought he was a good fighter but he was a very inconsistent champion early on and no one, NO ONE, was calling for a fight between him and Hopkins then.

one person cant speak for the entire planet, moving on bro...you werent interested in seeing the fight..both were one weight class apart for a long time....say that, keep it simple and move on.

[-PBP-]

blah blah, you dont agree with me...cool...moving on man

Oh hell no. You not getting off that easy.

On January 1, 2006, was Joe Calzaghe a legitimate world champion? Before he fought Jeff Lacy. Do you consider Joe Calzaghe, holder of the WBO title on January 1, 2006, to be a legitimate world champion? Answer that question.

[therealpugilist]

Oh hell no. You not getting off that easy.

On January 1, 2006, was Joe Calzaghe a legitimate world champion? Before he fought Jeff Lacy. Do you consider Joe Calzaghe, holder of the WBO title on January 1, 2006, to be a legitimate world champion? Answer that question.

can you read...i said the wbo wasnt legit then, and it isnt now imo

the fighters make the belts...he fought good fighters regardless with or without the trinket, if you dont know the guys he fought, cool, not my problem

he was a titlist...if you're not the undisputed champion or lineal you are a titlist

still doesnt change the fact that myself and other fans discussed calzaghe vs hopkins years before it happened and before hopkins fought tarver...moving on

now answer mine
Is GGG a legit world champion? he is "unified"

[bojangles1987]

Oh hell no. You not getting off that easy.

On January 1, 2006, was Joe Calzaghe a legitimate world champion? Before he fought Jeff Lacy. Do you consider Joe Calzaghe, holder of the WBO title on January 1, 2006, to be a legitimate world champion? Answer that question.

Of course he was. But Golovkin isn't. Something something poor competition something something boardrooms something something please don't remember that I said Golovkin was scared of Lemieux.

And Toney was better than Hopkins despite inconsistent performances because he beat better fighters. But Calzaghe was better than Tarver in 2006 because Tarver was too inconsistent, and it doesn't matter that he beat better fighters.