Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
No he hasn't Calzaghe has beaten every single opponent that has needed beating at Super Middleweight.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
Wrong. Calzaghe has handily defeated everyone that has been put before him by the organizations. Calzaghe has done just what Hopkins, Jones, & Floyd did...took on everyone that came his way.
There's no denying that. People lambast Calzaghe for never leaving home...neither did Hopkins, Jones, or Floyd.
I hate the double standard there...but most people rip Joe's opposition with having the knowledge of who the fighters were & what they had done.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
Wrong. Calzaghe has handily defeated everyone that has been put before him by the organizations. Calzaghe has done just what Hopkins, Jones, & Floyd did...took on everyone that came his way.
There's no denying that. People lambast Calzaghe for never leaving home...neither did Hopkins, Jones, or Floyd.
I hate the double standard there...but most people rip Joe's opposition with having the knowledge of who the fighters were & what they had done.
Also...Jones & Hopkins both outpriced themselves out of facing Calzaghe. Jones said that he wasn't a threat...Hopkins raised the bill at the critical week of the bidding.
But that was all Joe's fault.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
No he hasn't Calzaghe has beaten every single opponent that has needed beating at Super Middleweight.
If u think that is the case then it is unfair for anyone to say that Hopkins has chosen his opponents carefully. He has fought the harder fights than Joe C.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
No he hasn't Calzaghe has beaten every single opponent that has needed beating at Super Middleweight.
If u think that is the case then it is unfair for anyone to say that Hopkins has chosen his opponents carefully. He has fought the harder fights than Joe C.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
If u think that is the case then it is unfair for anyone to say that Hopkins has chosen his opponents carefully. He has fought the harder fights than Joe C.
I agree in fact Hopkins opposition is stronger than most people think.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
No he hasn't Calzaghe has beaten every single opponent that has needed beating at Super Middleweight.
If u think that is the case then it is unfair for anyone to say that Hopkins has chosen his opponents carefully. He has fought the harder fights than Joe C.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
If u think that is the case then it is unfair for anyone to say that Hopkins has chosen his opponents carefully. He has fought the harder fights than Joe C.
I agree in fact Hopkins opposition is stronger than most people think.
I think people should just take this for what it is, a fight between two guys who have both had incredible careers.
One is probably still at the top of his game and is the likely victor (JOE C) and he is trying to cement his legacy by beating a tpo US fighter in America.
The other fighter in BHOP is probably passed his best but is looking for a big pay day, and if things go his way just maybe another great win to finish of his ATG career, (not likely tho).
Joe C wont have it all his way becasue Hopkins is so crafty, but should win because of superior work rate.
All the talk about career records is pretty irrelevant now, they are both top fighters, and at the end of the day they will still be win or lose.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Sorry, but I think the way that Hopkins has picked his opponents is different to the way Calzaghe has. Calzaghe has chosen not to go to light-heavy and start from scratch where there was, for a long time, a bit more competition.
Hopkins has picked his opponents over recent years that he knows he can drag down to his level and that he can utilise his roughhouse spoiling style on effectively.
I agree that career-wise Calzaghe doesn't have the huge names that Hopkins has, but the Hopkins revival with his fights against Tarver and Winky were very well chosen opponents for him.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Sorry, but I think the way that Hopkins has picked his opponents is different to the way Calzaghe has. Calzaghe has chosen not to go to light-heavy and start from scratch where there was, for a long time, a bit more competition.
Hopkins has picked his opponents over recent years that he knows he can drag down to his level and that he can utilise his roughhouse spoiling style on effectively.
I agree that career-wise Calzaghe doesn't have the huge names that Hopkins has, but the Hopkins revival with his fights against Tarver and Winky were very well chosen opponents for him.
I disagree about Tarver. I think you're looking at it retrospectively. When the fight was announced very few people on here were picking Hopkins to win and most of us felt he was just taking the fight for the money.
Tarver looked awful in that fight but he hadn't upto that point and in winning back to rematches with Jones Jr and Johnson he was firmly established as the Ring Champ at 175 lbs.
That was a great win for BHop in my opinion and ironically considering the weight class it took place, possibly the signature fight of his entire career.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Sorry, but I think the way that Hopkins has picked his opponents is different to the way Calzaghe has. Calzaghe has chosen not to go to light-heavy and start from scratch where there was, for a long time, a bit more competition.
Hopkins has picked his opponents over recent years that he knows he can drag down to his level and that he can utilise his roughhouse spoiling style on effectively.
I agree that career-wise Calzaghe doesn't have the huge names that Hopkins has, but the Hopkins revival with his fights against Tarver and Winky were very well chosen opponents for him.
I disagree about Tarver. I think you're looking at it retrospectively. When the fight was announced very few people on here were picking Hopkins to win and most of us felt he was just taking the fight for the money.
Tarver looked awful in that fight but he hadn't upto that point and in winning back to rematches with Jones Jr and Johnson he was firmly established as the Ring Champ at 175 lbs.
That was a great win for BHop in my opinion and ironically considering the weight class it took place, possibly the signature fight of his entire career.
Tarver looked awful beating Jones the 3rd time. He had been messing about with his weight making Rocky movies.
Fighting him at that point was an extremely shrewd pick from Hopkins. He was there for the taking.
It's hardly surprising the majority picked against Hopkins. He was coming off back-to-back losses against Taylor, 41, and moving up two weight classes (although it was pretty clear Hopkins could have always been a lightheavy).
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
Wrong. Calzaghe has handily defeated everyone that has been put before him by the organizations. Calzaghe has done just what Hopkins, Jones, & Floyd did...took on everyone that came his way.
There's no denying that. People lambast Calzaghe for never leaving home...neither did Hopkins, Jones, or Floyd.
I hate the double standard there...but most people rip Joe's opposition with having the knowledge of who the fighters were & what they had done.
Thats at best a ridiculous statement
Hint,America is a very large country,with no real national identity
Germany is closer to you then Las Vegas is to Philadelphia
Hint 2,:notice how most European boxers go largely unnoticited until they travel to the states,thats because thats were most of the boxing fans actually live
Hint 3:Unless it actually is in a fighters hometown(see hint one) there is no home field advantage,now if the fight was happening at say the Core States Spectrum(or whatever they call it this week) youd have a point,but last I checked Bernard has only had one fight there in next to forever
Get it through your heads,I know you guys have a sense of identity,thats great,it really is.In the states we dont,its a massive country that almost nobody is actually from.
Joe actually would have had a better shot if he had gone for the Yankee Stadium deal,because honestly people from Philly and New York dont dislike each other,they loathe each other at a level that makes Russia and Germany seem like an ongoing tiff
I dare anyone to go to an Eagles Giants game and tell me thats not the case,especially if its in Philly
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales
Calzaghe has also carefully picked his opponants, aside from Kessler and maybe Lacy, and Reid, other than that, slim pickins, so yea in their situation age would still be a bigger factor for B-Hop
Wrong. Calzaghe has handily defeated everyone that has been put before him by the organizations. Calzaghe has done just what Hopkins, Jones, & Floyd did...took on everyone that came his way.
There's no denying that. People lambast Calzaghe for never leaving home...neither did Hopkins, Jones, or Floyd.
I hate the double standard there...but most people rip Joe's opposition with having the knowledge of who the fighters were & what they had done.
Thats at best a ridiculous statement
Hint,America is a very large country,with no real national identity
Germany is closer to you then Las Vegas is to Philadelphia
Hint 2,:notice how most European boxers go largely unnoticited until they travel to the states,thats because thats were most of the boxing fans actually live
Hint 3:Unless it actually is in a fighters hometown(see hint one) there is no home field advantage,now if the fight was happening at say the Core States Spectrum(or whatever they call it this week) youd have a point,but last I checked Bernard has only had one fight there in next to forever
Get it through your heads,I know you guys have a sense of identity,thats great,it really is.In the states we dont,its a massive country that almost nobody is actually from.
Joe actually would have had a better shot if he had gone for the Yankee Stadium deal,because honestly people from Philly and New York dont dislike each other,they loathe each other at a level that makes Russia and Germany seem like an ongoing tiff
I dare anyone to go to an Eagles Giants game and tell me thats not the case,especially if its in Philly
Wacko is an American.
Re: Calzaghe/Hopkins article
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
Quote:
Originally Posted by superheavyrhun
Sorry bro, but I just can't see where you're coming from calling it a bulls**t statement. Calzaghe's 35 years old and has always made it clear that he's not going to go on fighting too long like a Holyfield.
You state yourself that Hopkins is a never-aging phenom, so you can't put everyone up against his yardstick. The only reason that Hopkins is still fighting at 43 is that he's picked his fights carefully, choosing those he can win, and fighting in a style that makes him very difficult to hit and in a way where he doesn't take too much damage. I wouldn't want Calzaghe to go down that route and become a spoiler to negate the aging factor.
Same goes with your comment mate, I mean if u think Hopkins has picked his opponents carefully then u must agree the same can be said about Joe C who has historically fought lsser opponents than BHOP.
Sorry, but I think the way that Hopkins has picked his opponents is different to the way Calzaghe has. Calzaghe has chosen not to go to light-heavy and start from scratch where there was, for a long time, a bit more competition.
Hopkins has picked his opponents over recent years that he knows he can drag down to his level and that he can utilise his roughhouse spoiling style on effectively.
I agree that career-wise Calzaghe doesn't have the huge names that Hopkins has, but the Hopkins revival with his fights against Tarver and Winky were very well chosen opponents for him.
I disagree about Tarver. I think you're looking at it retrospectively. When the fight was announced very few people on here were picking Hopkins to win and most of us felt he was just taking the fight for the money.
Tarver looked awful in that fight but he hadn't upto that point and in winning back to rematches with Jones Jr and Johnson he was firmly established as the Ring Champ at 175 lbs.
That was a great win for BHop in my opinion and ironically considering the weight class it took place, possibly the signature fight of his entire career.
Tarver looked awful beating Jones the 3rd time. He had been messing about with his weight making Rocky movies.
Fighting him at that point was an extremely shrewd pick from Hopkins. He was there for the taking.
It's hardly surprising the majority picked against Hopkins. He was coming off back-to-back losses against Taylor, 41, and moving up two weight classes (although it was pretty clear Hopkins could have always been a lightheavy).
Tarver looked better in beating Roy Jones than Jermain Taylor did in beating Cory Spinks so by your logic Kelly Pavlik handpicked him for an easy victory ::**
You have to be seriously hating on a fighter if you consider them moving up TWO divisions to face the universally recognised Ring Champion handpicking an opponent?
Who else could he have fought? Taylor was the man at middle and he fought him twice, Winky was the other man and he fought him too. The only other opponent out there was Calzaghe and now he's fighting him as well.
