Very close because of the 10-8 1st round and Hopkins winning at least 3 of the first 4 rounds. I can't see how anybody gives him a round after round 5 thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by miles
Printable View
Very close because of the 10-8 1st round and Hopkins winning at least 3 of the first 4 rounds. I can't see how anybody gives him a round after round 5 thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by miles
I had Hopkins up by about 1 or 2 points but at worst i thought a draw i didn't think Calzaghe did enough to take the title from the champ. One thing i will say is Calzaghe said he under performed but then he fought no different vs Jones really but Bernard did under perform so if they fought again Bernard could fight better but i don't think Calzaghe can so Hopkins would take rematch for me.
It was a horrible fight, Hopkins was unwilling or more likely unable to make a fight of it after those early rounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HVery close because of the 10-8 1st round and Hopkins winning at least 3 of the first 4 rounds. I can't see how anybody gives him a round after round 5 thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by miles
Part of me would like to see a rematch because I think Calzaghe could do a much better job. Having said that, even if Calzaghe outlanded Hopkins by 500 and shut him out for 10 of 12 rounds, you would still get the same people disagreeing with how the vast majority go about scoring their fights.
I think Calzaghe did underperform and the bad start and spoiling tactics of Hopkins only cemented the struggle. Hopkins was gassing against a Calzaghe who was throwing far less than normal and a subdued Calzaghe still got it done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragos Bitch
Calzaghe knows what to expect of Hopkins now. And if Hopkins goes at Calzaghe like he did against Pavlik then that would be suicide for Hopkins. Calzaghe wont just stand there and take it, he would respond and wear Hopkins down something rotten.
One of these polls was done immediately after the fight - it was a landslide for Calzaghe.
I think it's best to let the neutrals judge in these close-ish fights.
You'll never see a hater pick Joe and likewise his fans will pick him.. but the neutrals overwhelmingly thought Calzaghe won. Which he did. Fact. ;)
If the fans debate over this fight like this its shows their should be a rematch i know Calzaghe won't rematch him but us the fans know their should be one.
Calzaghe fights the same in every fight. he looked no different against nard than he did others. Difference is Nard is so slippery. He wouldn't do any better. He'd probably do worse now that Nard knows Cal will throw even if he's hitting nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by milesI think Calzaghe did underperform and the bad start and spoiling tactics of Hopkins only cemented the struggle. Hopkins was gassing against a Calzaghe who was throwing far less than normal and a subdued Calzaghe still got it done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragos Bitch
Calzaghe knows what to expect of Hopkins now. And if Hopkins goes at Calzaghe like he did against Pavlik then that would be suicide for Hopkins. Calzaghe wont just stand there and take it, he would respond and wear Hopkins down something rotten.
calzaghe by a point :-\
Don't think so.. he'd beat Hopkins much easier if they fought again.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabileCalzaghe fights the same in every fight. he looked no different against nard than he did others. Difference is Nard is so slippery. He wouldn't do any better. He'd probably do worse now that Nard knows Cal will throw even if he's hitting nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by milesI think Calzaghe did underperform and the bad start and spoiling tactics of Hopkins only cemented the struggle. Hopkins was gassing against a Calzaghe who was throwing far less than normal and a subdued Calzaghe still got it done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragos Bitch
Calzaghe knows what to expect of Hopkins now. And if Hopkins goes at Calzaghe like he did against Pavlik then that would be suicide for Hopkins. Calzaghe wont just stand there and take it, he would respond and wear Hopkins down something rotten.
First off - It was Calzaghe's first fight at 175.
Secondly - It wont be in Hopkins USA backyard.
Even with ALL the advantages last time Hopkins STILL couldn't win. By rights Hopkins should have been thrown-out for cheating in the 10th round.
You're clearly a fanboy. If hopkins increases his volume even a fraction of what he did in the first fight ,he wins. It's that simple. You should also follow bhops career a bit better. He's often times been called teh dirtiest fighter in the game for a reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterDon't think so.. he'd beat Hopkins much easier if they fought again.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabileCalzaghe fights the same in every fight. he looked no different against nard than he did others. Difference is Nard is so slippery. He wouldn't do any better. He'd probably do worse now that Nard knows Cal will throw even if he's hitting nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
First off - It was Calzaghe's first fight at 175.
Secondly - It wont be in Hopkins USA backyard.
Even with ALL the advantages last time Hopkins STILL couldn't win. By rights Hopkins should have been thrown-out for cheating in the 10th round.
What he did in the 10th? He's done in about 6 or 7 other fights. The whole low blow thing was de ja vu for me, having seen all of bhops fights.
I'm a fanboy for telling the truth? Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabileYou're clearly a fanboy. If hopkins increases his volume even a fraction of what he did in the first fight ,he wins. It's that simple. You should also follow bhops career a bit better. He's often times been called teh dirtiest fighter in the game for a reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterDon't think so.. he'd beat Hopkins much easier if they fought again.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabile
First off - It was Calzaghe's first fight at 175.
Secondly - It wont be in Hopkins USA backyard.
Even with ALL the advantages last time Hopkins STILL couldn't win. By rights Hopkins should have been thrown-out for cheating in the 10th round.
What he did in the 10th? He's done in about 6 or 7 other fights. The whole low blow thing was de ja vu for me, having seen all of bhops fights.
So.. you advocate CHEATING!!! Thats pretty low man. You would rather see a fighter win from fraudulent theatrics than fair and square?
I didn't say i advocate anything. I'm just saying, he does it all the time. And it wasn't cheating an any way. It was exaggerating the truth. He was hit low, it didn't hurt, but he exaggerated it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterI'm a fanboy for telling the truth? Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabileYou're clearly a fanboy. If hopkins increases his volume even a fraction of what he did in the first fight ,he wins. It's that simple. You should also follow bhops career a bit better. He's often times been called teh dirtiest fighter in the game for a reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
What he did in the 10th? He's done in about 6 or 7 other fights. The whole low blow thing was de ja vu for me, having seen all of bhops fights.
So.. you advocate CHEATING!!! Thats pretty low man. You would rather see a fighter win from fraudulent theatrics than fair and square?
When people are hit in the back of the head, even grazed, they always complain and tell the ref.. sometimes making it to be something more than it is.
It's call winning. Some people do whatever it takes to win, bernard is one of them.
If i get hit low, even if it doesnt hurt, and i have a chance to use that against my opponent.. why shouldn't I? That's either a point taken from him, or 5 minutes for me to rest. Bhop is smart.
BHop is smart, but he is also a dirty cheat. And to make excuses for it is a reflection upon yourself. The way you talk, you are nothing but a fan boy yourself. And also a hater.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabileI didn't say i advocate anything. I'm just saying, he does it all the time. And it wasn't cheating an any way. It was exaggerating the truth. He was hit low, it didn't hurt, but he exaggerated it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterI'm a fanboy for telling the truth? Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by intoccabile
So.. you advocate CHEATING!!! Thats pretty low man. You would rather see a fighter win from fraudulent theatrics than fair and square?
When people are hit in the back of the head, even grazed, they always complain and tell the ref.. sometimes making it to be something more than it is.
It's call winning. Some people do whatever it takes to win, bernard is one of them.
If i get hit low, even if it doesnt hurt, and i have a chance to use that against my opponent.. why shouldn't I? That's either a point taken from him, or 5 minutes for me to rest. Bhop is smart.
Didnt you say you saw "no way of seeing how Jones could lose to Calzaghe?" And two days later you remarkably pronounce that Jones Jr is shot. :rolleyes:
Thats some boxing knowledge right there. Amazing insight.
And here you are telling us that BHop would most likely do better in a rematch. Do you really think Calzaghe would go in with exactly the same gameplan as well. Is it really "that simple"? Hopkins throws a bit more and wins? ;D
And you are telling other people they are fanboys?? Wow. :-\:rolleyes:
I am not a fan of calzaghe but he won fair and square bhop resorted to cheating and turned it into a holding match because he could do nothing else this is not how you win this is how you get people to say it was close because no one landed anything thats not a champ in my opinion thats a boring fighter who has a good boxing brain and knows how to survive without getting hurt and not making the other guy look good
Seen the fight 3 times and each time i scored it 115-112 for calzaghe with what should of been a hopkins points deduction for blatant headbutts 3 or 4 times.
Calzaghe came to fight, hopkins came to spoil