Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch

I had Calzaghe winning by at least a couple of points. He outworked Hopkins, this despite the more eye-catching punches coming from Hopkins (in the early rounds, at least), because Hopkins simply didn't throw enough and was swamped by Calzaghe's output. Joe pressed the action and although he landed very few hurtful shots himself, there was so little coming back in comparison that you had to give him the rounds.

Calzaghe landed 105 (83%) more punches than Hopkins. This isn't like Pacquiao/Marquez III where the punch output was similar and the quality of work SHOULD be absolutely PARAMOUNT. Punch output is a major thing on its own, certainly when one fighter is nearly landing twice as many punches as his opponent. Calzaghe was coming forward trying to fight and Hopkins being his usual anti-boxing self, smothering and holding, faking low blows to get a breather, throwing little and landing less and less as the fight went on.

A dismal fight caused by Hopkins' negativity and Calzaghe's inability to work him out (he's not alone there), but I can't see how anyone could score more than three or four rounds to Hopkins given his total lack of output in most of them.

With that said, this fight does lead you to believe that a younger, fresher Hopkins with more stamina most likely wins a UD.

I scored it the same as Eric, first 4 to Hopkins, then last 8 rounds to JC. Not all JCs punches were slaps and even if they were at least he was throwing something. Hopkins did nothing after 4 rounds. Fight was there to be won for him. The only thing I can think of is that JCs workrate was too much for him

I know people will disagree with this, but I genuinely and objectively believe that Calzaghe was more past his best in that fight than Hopkins was. He was there for the taking imo. Going down to those 2 punches (Hopkins & RJJ) would not have happened a couple of years earlier. I saw him interviewed shortly after he retired and he said he retired becuase he was had nothing left and he was going to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

...and it was Calzaghe's 43rd fight!! LMAO..honestly :vd: I rest my case, I really do. The fuck are you doing fighting Manfredo in your 43rd fight? 3 fights away from retirement..

---

yes it was his 43rd fight, but you name me a boxer that once he has made it to the top hasnt had "fights off", all the top fighters do, including hopkins and i bet you could find fighters that arent top of the pile who hopkins has fought during the latter part of his carear. This is a very bitter statement

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

The measure for me isn't how many casual fans thought Calzaghe won..it's easy to speak to the majority of Brits who will automatically have a bias towards a fellow Brit so your results are automatically skewed.

---

yes people are bias towards the fighters they like. Calzaghe won the fight tho, it wasnt a controversial decision, to shout and scream about the calzaghe fans being biast because they agree with the decision shows bitterness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

I'm talking if any of you are close to the boxing community. I promise you, the week after that fight I didn't hear one person say they thought that Calzaghe won that fight. From amateur boxers in Repton..from trainers to pro boxers. Nobody. They were all Brit's too. THAT to me is a much better and neutral measure of what happened in the fight.

---

this is utter bollox mate and also shows bitterness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

The whole "well, 70% of the public thought he won" is a mute point anyway. He got the "W" JUST..and it was his greatest victory..a split decision over a 40-something Bhop. I rest my case..He sucks balls.

---

yep, i think considering what hopkins has done since, calzaghe so clearly won the last 8 rounds it was probably his best win. He obviously doesnt suck balls tho :)

---

Ok sure, you win! You have totally owned me with your argument against the facts I present by palming them off as bitterness. You definitely win..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

I know people will disagree with this, but I genuinely and objectively believe that Calzaghe was more past his best in that fight than Hopkins was. He was there for the taking imo. Going down to those 2 punches (Hopkins & RJJ) would not have happened a couple of years earlier. I saw him interviewed shortly after he retired and he said he retired becuase he was had nothing left and he was going to lose.

---

BigH what makes you say JC was past his best? Let's put JCs CV to one side because we'll never agree there...but what fights can you tell me that JC had been in that meant JC was more past his best than Hopkins was? Hopkins too hadn't really been in any grueling fights so that only leaves age as the determining factor, right?

Also I and probably a few others believe that the first round KDs probably would have still stood in JCs prime (which he was close to anyway imo)..Roy Jones was a joke in that fight and I truly believe even old ass Jones could have taken JC out in that round if he wanted instead of clowning..JC was HURT. Anyway prime Roy tears JC a new hole. My favourite argument of all time is the one that JC would have stood a chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

I know people will disagree with this, but I genuinely and objectively believe that Calzaghe was more past his best in that fight than Hopkins was. He was there for the taking imo. Going down to those 2 punches (Hopkins & RJJ) would not have happened a couple of years earlier. I saw him interviewed shortly after he retired and he said he retired becuase he was had nothing left and he was going to lose.

---

BigH what makes you say JC was past his best? Let's put JCs CV to one side because we'll never agree there...but what fights can you tell me that JC had been in that meant JC was more past his best than Hopkins was? Hopkins too hadn't really been in any grueling fights so that only leaves age as the determining factor, right?

Also I and probably a few others believe that the first round KDs probably would have still stood in JCs prime (which he was close to anyway imo)..Roy Jones was a joke in that fight and I truly believe even old ass Jones could have taken JC out in that round if he wanted instead of clowning..JC was HURT. Anyway prime Roy tears JC a new hole. My favourite argument of all time is the one that JC would have stood a chance.

---

I don't think JC was 'past his best' becuase of age or been in wars (which he wasn't) I just think he got old quickly as some fighters do and there is often no reason. He had a long amateur career, 11 years as undefeated champion as a pro, I think his last 2 fights were just paydays and he had very little desire left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Ok sure, you win! You have totally owned me with your argument against the facts I present by palming them off as bitterness. You definitely win..

---

ha, so the facts are that (1) JC fought Manfredo in his 43rd fight and (2) people tend to be biast towards fighters from their own country - and these facts mean that Hopkins beat Calzaghe and Calzaghe is rubbish?

Because i'm bored, i am going to give this fight another watch just now and i will post my scorecard afterwards.

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

You forgot one thing,your score card or my score card,don't count for much,Calzaghe still the winner take it on the chin the better Man won, weather you like it or not.?;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

just watch the 6th and 10th

calzaghe won the 6th, hopkins spent most of his time walking forward head down and then holding, calzaghe landed all the punches

the 10th is close, calzaghe still landed more, hopkins spent a lot of the round rolling around the floor, i think to award it to hopkins is harsh but i can accept it

What this fight,come's down too are you a Calzaghe fan or a Hopkins fan, in this fight the judge's made
Calzaghe the winner.?Not unlike the Hagler v SRL, fight which you have to say people still bitch about
we all have a opinion,it's the judge's that count.? So when your fighter get's beat take it on the chin this
include's myself.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

You forgot one thing,your score card or my score card,don't count for much,Calzaghe still the winner take it on the chin the better Man won, weather you like it or not.?;)

---

I have no problem with Calzaghe winning.

It was a close fight with tough rounds to score majority of the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

just watch the 6th and 10th

calzaghe won the 6th, hopkins spent most of his time walking forward head down and then holding, calzaghe landed all the punches

the 10th is close, calzaghe still landed more, hopkins spent a lot of the round rolling around the floor, i think to award it to hopkins is harsh but i can accept it

---

I rewatched the 6th round and it was a close one but Hopkins was able to land the cleaner shots again.

I recall him landing some good body shots early, good left hook off the ropes, nice right hand leads to body and head and a few solid jabs.

Joe was able to land a good straight left early in the round and the occassional jab throughout the round but his punches for the most part were ineffective or missing.

The 10th round was a clearish round for Hopkins.

You can't take the round away from Hopkins because he exaggerated a low blow. If you score the round based on the scoring criteria, you and most should score that round for Bhop.

After Hopkins got his rest, he was able to pop Joe with good shots the rest of the round.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

You forgot one thing,your score card or my score card,don't count for much,Calzaghe still the winner take it on the chin the better Man won, weather you like it or not.?;)

---

I have no problem with Calzaghe winning.

It was a close fight with tough rounds to score majority of the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

just watch the 6th and 10th

calzaghe won the 6th, hopkins spent most of his time walking forward head down and then holding, calzaghe landed all the punches

the 10th is close, calzaghe still landed more, hopkins spent a lot of the round rolling around the floor, i think to award it to hopkins is harsh but i can accept it

---

I rewatched the 6th round and it was a close one but Hopkins was able to land the cleaner shots again.

I recall him landing some good body shots early, good left hook off the ropes, nice right hand leads to body and head and a few solid jabs.

Joe was able to land a good straight left early in the round and the occassional jab throughout the round but his punches for the most part were ineffective or missing.

The 10th round was a clearish round for Hopkins.

You can't take the round away from Hopkins because he exaggerated a low blow. If you score the round based on the scoring criteria, you and most should score that round for Bhop.

After Hopkins got his rest, he was able to pop Joe with good shots the rest of the round.

---

I have seen the fight no end of time's, to be honest Hopkins could have lost point's in a few round's
lot's of holding and hitting blind side of the ref, using his head,it's the way he fight's.
I no you are a fan of his but he doe's fight and win ugly, on this occasion he lost, I will give you that he is one hard SOB to beat.? he is a Marmite fighter to people love him or hate him.?;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

You forgot one thing,your score card or my score card,don't count for much,Calzaghe still the winner take it on the chin the better Man won, weather you like it or not.?;)

---

I have no problem with Calzaghe winning.

It was a close fight with tough rounds to score majority of the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

just watch the 6th and 10th

calzaghe won the 6th, hopkins spent most of his time walking forward head down and then holding, calzaghe landed all the punches

the 10th is close, calzaghe still landed more, hopkins spent a lot of the round rolling around the floor, i think to award it to hopkins is harsh but i can accept it

---

I rewatched the 6th round and it was a close one but Hopkins was able to land the cleaner shots again.

I recall him landing some good body shots early, good left hook off the ropes, nice right hand leads to body and head and a few solid jabs.

Joe was able to land a good straight left early in the round and the occassional jab throughout the round but his punches for the most part were ineffective or missing.

The 10th round was a clearish round for Hopkins.

You can't take the round away from Hopkins because he exaggerated a low blow. If you score the round based on the scoring criteria, you and most should score that round for Bhop.

After Hopkins got his rest, he was able to pop Joe with good shots the rest of the round.

---

I have seen the fight no end of time's, to be honest Hopkins could have lost point's in a few round's
lot's of holding and hitting blind side of the ref, using his head,it's the way he fight's.
I no you are a fan of his but he doe's fight and win ugly, on this occasion he lost, I will give you that he is one hard SOB to beat.? he is a Marmite fighter to people love him or hate him.?;D

---

Hopkins doesn't always rely on dirty tactics, like his two fights against Pascal, Pavlik, Tarver, etc.

Hopkins did nothing in the Calzaghe fight that was worth a point deduction. There was clinches and a few headbutts but nothing too excessive.

Hopkins lost the fight yes, but he was not beaten decisively no matter which way you Calzaghe fans try to twist it.

Calzaghe is allowed to be in close fights right ? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

You forgot one thing,your score card or my score card,don't count for much,Calzaghe still the winner take it on the chin the better Man won, weather you like it or not.?;)

---

I have no problem with Calzaghe winning.

It was a close fight with tough rounds to score majority of the fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pugilistic

My scorecard.

Rd1 Hopkins 10-8
Rd2 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd3 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd4 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd5 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd6 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd7 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd8 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd9 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd10 - Hopkins 10-9
Rd11 - Calzaghe 10-9
Rd12 - Calzaghe 10-9

Total 114-113 Hopkins.

---

just watch the 6th and 10th

calzaghe won the 6th, hopkins spent most of his time walking forward head down and then holding, calzaghe landed all the punches

the 10th is close, calzaghe still landed more, hopkins spent a lot of the round rolling around the floor, i think to award it to hopkins is harsh but i can accept it

---

I rewatched the 6th round and it was a close one but Hopkins was able to land the cleaner shots again.

I recall him landing some good body shots early, good left hook off the ropes, nice right hand leads to body and head and a few solid jabs.

Joe was able to land a good straight left early in the round and the occassional jab throughout the round but his punches for the most part were ineffective or missing.

The 10th round was a clearish round for Hopkins.

You can't take the round away from Hopkins because he exaggerated a low blow. If you score the round based on the scoring criteria, you and most should score that round for Bhop.

After Hopkins got his rest, he was able to pop Joe with good shots the rest of the round.

---

I have seen the fight no end of time's, to be honest Hopkins could have lost point's in a few round's
lot's of holding and hitting blind side of the ref, using his head,it's the way he fight's.
I no you are a fan of his but he doe's fight and win ugly, on this occasion he lost, I will give you that he is one hard SOB to beat.? he is a Marmite fighter to people love him or hate him.?;D

---

Hopkins doesn't always rely on dirty tactics, like his two fights against Pascal, Pavlik, Tarver, etc.

Hopkins did nothing in the Calzaghe fight that was worth a point deduction. There was clinches and a few headbutts but nothing too excessive.

Hopkins lost the fight yes, but he was not beaten decisively no matter which way you Calzaghe fans try to twist it.

Calzaghe is allowed to be in close fights right ? :)

---

All fighter's are allowed to be in close fight's including Calzaghe ,;)

I have to say that our opinions of the fight are as valuable as the judges, mainly because judges aren't really any more qualified to judge a fight than we are. Yes, the judges are responsible for the result, but they really aren't all that good a lot of the time. Calzaghe was a good fighter, but not a great one. He fought subpar fighters for most of his career except the last part of it. He did not have a good chin, as evidenced by his being knocked down by a washed-up Roy Jones Jr. and Bernard Hopkins (who doesn't usually knock anyone down). He did rebound very nicely against Hopkins, but a lot of his punches were half-ass. Bernard landed the better shots all night, which is why I gave him the win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbaron

I have to say that our opinions of the fight are as valuable as the judges, mainly because judges aren't really any more qualified to judge a fight than we are. Yes, the judges are responsible for the result, but they really aren't all that good a lot of the time. Calzaghe was a good fighter, but not a great one. He fought subpar fighters for most of his career except the last part of it. He did not have a good chin, as evidenced by his being knocked down by a washed-up Roy Jones Jr. and Bernard Hopkins (who doesn't usually knock anyone down). He did rebound very nicely against Hopkins, but a lot of his punches were half-ass. Bernard landed the better shots all night, which is why I gave him the win.

---

;D troll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbaron

I have to say that our opinions of the fight are as valuable as the judges, mainly because judges aren't really any more qualified to judge a fight than we are. Yes, the judges are responsible for the result, but they really aren't all that good a lot of the time. Calzaghe was a good fighter, but not a great one. He fought subpar fighters for most of his career except the last part of it. He did not have a good chin, as evidenced by his being knocked down by a washed-up Roy Jones Jr. and Bernard Hopkins (who doesn't usually knock anyone down). He did rebound very nicely against Hopkins, but a lot of his punches were half-ass. Bernard landed the better shots all night, which is why I gave him the win.

---

Welcome to the forum buddy *hugs*

Always good to have another real boxing fan on Saddo :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbaron

I have to say that our opinions of the fight are as valuable as the judges, mainly because judges aren't really any more qualified to judge a fight than we are. Yes, the judges are responsible for the result, but they really aren't all that good a lot of the time. Calzaghe was a good fighter, but not a great one. He fought subpar fighters for most of his career except the last part of it. He did not have a good chin, as evidenced by his being knocked down by a washed-up Roy Jones Jr. and Bernard Hopkins (who doesn't usually knock anyone down). He did rebound very nicely against Hopkins, but a lot of his punches were half-ass. Bernard landed the better shots all night, which is why I gave him the win.

---

Welcome to the forum buddy *hugs*

Always good to have another real boxing fan on Saddo :D

---

Undefeated Undisputed World Champion Joe Calzaghe,it seem's it make's you 2 feel like:throwup:
I no he's great fighter.?;D

Bando, I've really learnt to love you over the past few weeks. I don't know what I'd do one day if I arrived here and didn't see your question mark ending sentences (even when you're not asking a question)

*hugs*

Plus you know me so well. Any talk of JC being "great" does indeed induce a feeling of nausea in me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Bando, I've really learnt to love you over the past few weeks. I don't know what I'd do one day if I arrived here and didn't see your question mark ending sentences (even when you're not asking a question)

*hugs*

Plus you know me so well. Any talk of JC being "great" does indeed induce a feeling of nausea in me.

---

I NO;D ????????????????:lolhaha:

Bhops is Calzaghe's bitch, plain and simple. Not only did that snaggle tooth conman get outworked but he also got anal raped in the process so you tell me who owns who...

fuckin fake ass boring punk..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Bhops is Calzaghe's bitch, plain and simple. Not only did that snaggle tooth conman get outworked but he also got anal raped in the process so you tell me who owns who...

fuckin fake ass boring punk..

---

Yup, he outworked Bhop in the compubox "bitch slaps" stats by about 400 to zero and also easily outworked his opponent in the "hitting thin air" section too.

So in answer to your question Bhop won vs the Welsh bum-raping con man due to neither of those statistics being a requirement to win a boxing match (nor is ass rape)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Bhops is Calzaghe's bitch, plain and simple. Not only did that snaggle tooth conman get outworked but he also got anal raped in the process so you tell me who owns who...

fuckin fake ass boring punk..

---

Yup, he outworked Bhop in the compubox "bitch slaps" stats by about 400 to zero and also easily outworked his opponent in the "hitting thin air" section too.

So in answer to your question Bhop won vs the Welsh bum-raping con man due to neither of those statistics being a requirement to win a boxing match (nor is ass rape)

---

I can SEE you are a Calzaghe fan, it must be very hard for you to express your feeling for this great boxer. O I forgot?????????????. Hug's;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

---

If thats the most retarded thing he has said then it must be extremely retarded :cool:

Stupid arguments from the Hopkins crowd.

It was an easy Calzaghe win and that's without the invisible low blows and all that nonsense.

Outlanded, out thrown and old with a wonky willy.

With a nob like that I am amazed he continued.

Yup... ;)

How many people do you know win a fight and then demand a rematch more than the loser did? ??? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yup... ;)

How many people do you know win a fight and then demand a rematch more than the loser did? ??? :rolleyes:

---

bredis prescott?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

---

Damn. 10 days it took you to build up the courage to finally quote my post. Amazing.

It's not even about who won or loss stupid. It's about leaving no doubt. Regardless of who got the win, it was a close fight. Whoever says otherwise is either stupid like you or can't fucking score. Considering Calzaghe had nobody else of note to fight he should of took the rematch and removed all doubt. Like champions do. You think Mayweather needed to rematch Jose Luis Castillo? No. He was already set to move up. But he decided to remove all doubt. Everybody knew De La Hoya was better than Chavez when they finally metal. But the ending to there first fight didn't quiet Chavez. So he removed all doubt. It's what champions do. But not everybody is built like that. Some fighters know in there heart they got a lucky win and would do every thing they can to avoid a rematch. Hatton-Collazo is great example. Lennox Lewis did to Vitali. Calzaghe has history doing it. He claimed he didn't do rematches to avoid a facing Robin Reid again. Years later the coward rematches Mario Veit. There was unfinished bisness in the Hopkins fight that should of been addressed. But they weren't. Why? Cuz Cokezaghe knew in his heart he got a gift.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

---

Damn. 10 days it took you to build up the courage to finally quote my post. Amazing.

It's not even about who won or loss stupid. It's about leaving no doubt. Regardless of who got the win, it was a close fight. Whoever says otherwise is either stupid like you or can't fucking score. Considering Calzaghe had nobody else of note to fight he should of took the rematch and removed all doubt. Like champions do. You think Mayweather needed to rematch Jose Luis Castillo? No. He was already set to move up. But he decided to remove all doubt. Everybody knew De La Hoya was better than Chavez when they finally metal. But the ending to there first fight didn't quiet Chavez. So he removed all doubt. It's what champions do. But not everybody is built like that. Some fighters know in there heart they got a lucky win and would do every thing they can to avoid a rematch. Hatton-Collazo is great example. Lennox Lewis did to Vitali. Calzaghe has history doing it. He claimed he didn't do rematches to avoid a facing Robin Reid again. Years later the coward rematches Mario Veit. There was unfinished bisness in the Hopkins fight that should of been addressed. But they weren't. Why? Cuz Cokezaghe knew in his heart he got a gift.

---

nah man

calzaghe never rematched, and if he was to rematch anyone, reid deserved one more than hopkins coz he put up more of a fight :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

---

Damn. 10 days it took you to build up the courage to finally quote my post. Amazing.

It's not even about who won or loss stupid. It's about leaving no doubt. Regardless of who got the win, it was a close fight. Whoever says otherwise is either stupid like you or can't fucking score. Considering Calzaghe had nobody else of note to fight he should of took the rematch and removed all doubt. Like champions do. You think Mayweather needed to rematch Jose Luis Castillo? No. He was already set to move up. But he decided to remove all doubt. Everybody knew De La Hoya was better than Chavez when they finally metal. But the ending to there first fight didn't quiet Chavez. So he removed all doubt. It's what champions do. But not everybody is built like that. Some fighters know in there heart they got a lucky win and would do every thing they can to avoid a rematch. Hatton-Collazo is great example. Lennox Lewis did to Vitali. Calzaghe has history doing it. He claimed he didn't do rematches to avoid a facing Robin Reid again. Years later the coward rematches Mario Veit. There was unfinished bisness in the Hopkins fight that should of been addressed. But they weren't. Why? Cuz Cokezaghe knew in his heart he got a gift.

---

nah man

calzaghe never rematched, and if he was to rematch anyone, reid deserved one more than hopkins coz he put up more of a fight :)

---

I deal in facts only.

Fact 1. He had a hard fight against Robin Reid. A SD win that many thought Reid deserved to win. Rematch? No.

Fact 2. He had a close fight against Bernard Hopkins in which he was knocked down and stunned more than once. A SD win that many gave to Hopkins. Rematch? No.

Fact 3. He destroyed Mario Veit in less than 3 minutes. It was a legit knock out without controversy. Rematch? Yes.

Facts don't fucking lie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

I deal in facts only.

Fact 1. He had a hard fight against Robin Reid. A SD win that many thought Reid deserved to win. Rematch? No.

Fact 2. He had a close fight against Bernard Hopkins in which he was knocked down and stunned more than once. A SD win that many gave to Hopkins. Rematch? No.

Fact 3. He destroyed Mario Veit in less than 3 minutes. It was a legit knock out without controversy. Rematch? Yes.

Facts don't fucking lie.

---

the bit in bold isnt a fact

this alone makes your post inacurrate and i am unable to continue with our conversation until you right your wrong :)

Obviously I read your post 10 days ago denise and only got the courage to reply now. You're so important that I had to spend 10 days getting fired up to deal with you... :rolleyes:

Also Calzaghe didn't rematch Hopkins cos he knew he'd lose.

You must be psychic Venereal... You can clearly look deep into a man and see what he is thinking.

:vd:

(did you ever think calzaghe might think he won clear enough? Shocking idea I know!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Obviously I read your post 10 days ago denise and only got the courage to reply now. You're so important that I had to spend 10 days getting fired up to deal with you... :rolleyes:

Also Calzaghe didn't rematch Hopkins cos he knew he'd lose.

You must be psychic Venereal... You can clearly look deep into a man and see what he is thinking.

:vd:

(did you ever think calzaghe might think he won clear enough? Shocking idea I know!)

---

All way's interesting people want Hopkins, to win but did he, some say a close fight I say not Joe was made the winner, if you don't like it's how it go's don't bitch about it Hopkins lost take it on the chin if you can.;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Obviously I read your post 10 days ago denise and only got the courage to reply now. You're so important that I had to spend 10 days getting fired up to deal with you... :rolleyes:

Also Calzaghe didn't rematch Hopkins cos he knew he'd lose.

You must be psychic Venereal... You can clearly look deep into a man and see what he is thinking.

:vd:

(did you ever think calzaghe might think he won clear enough? Shocking idea I know!)

---

Than Calzaghe's even dumber than you. That or the crack must of fucked up his brain. The man gets dropped. Hurt. Clearly loses at least 4 rounds without question. Escapes with a SD gift. Yet he considers that a clear win? :vd: And i'm sure you agree with him

Yes, again as shocking as it may sound - some people may not agree with your narrow, blinkered way of thinking.

I think if Calzaghe was a natural 154lb fighter and Hopkins wasn't so fucking lazy in that fight he would have pulled out the win. But he didn't, boo hoo :rolleyes:

Hopkins didn't have size on his side like he had in his precious big fights and he sure as fuck didn't have youth or workrate. He was a world class spoiler in that fight though and that's what made it so close... Its up to a judge whether they favour spoilibg tactics or not (or whether, like you they simply just dislike brits).

The diving and play acting he did whilst calzaghe arse raped him is proof enough that the pace was just too much for the old man. Oh well, nevermind... Hopkins has done enough since to redeem the loss, I doubt he worries too much about it - you on the on the other hand still seem pathetically butt hurt by it, grow a pair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

As for the hypothetical rematch? Pretty simple. There's a reason Hopkins pushed and pushed for a rematch. And while Calzaghe didn't.

---

Most retarded thing I have ever heard you say. Hopkins didn't get the W and joe did... Of course he wanted a rematch more.

---

It's not even about who won or loss stupid. It's about leaving no doubt. Regardless of who got the win, it was a close fight. Whoever says otherwise is either stupid like you or can't fucking score. Considering Calzaghe had nobody else of note to fight he should of took the rematch and removed all doubt. Like champions do. You think Mayweather needed to rematch Jose Luis Castillo? No. He was already set to move up. But he decided to remove all doubt. Everybody knew De La Hoya was better than Chavez when they finally metal. But the ending to there first fight didn't quiet Chavez. So he removed all doubt. It's what champions do. But not everybody is built like that. Some fighters know in there heart they got a lucky win and would do every thing they can to avoid a rematch. Hatton-Collazo is great example. Lennox Lewis did to Vitali. Calzaghe has history doing it. He claimed he didn't do rematches to avoid a facing Robin Reid again. Years later the coward rematches Mario Veit. There was unfinished bisness in the Hopkins fight that should of been addressed. But they weren't. Why? Cuz Cokezaghe knew in his heart he got a gift.

---

There is nothing in there that anyone can actually argue with - Calzaghe makes my blood boil with his bullshit. How anyone can be proud to defend this "champion" is beyond me. Can we let this thread die now? Calzaghe is getting more attention in this thread than he did in his entire luke-warm career. There's a reason Calzaghe bitched and moaned about not being popular when he was active..because he sucked. The public weren't fooled by his deluded arrogance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yes, again as shocking as it may sound - some people may not agree with your narrow, blinkered way of thinking.

I think if Calzaghe was a natural 154lb fighter and Hopkins wasn't so fucking lazy in that fight he would have pulled out the win. But he didn't, boo hoo :rolleyes:

Hopkins didn't have size on his side like he had in his precious big fights and he sure as fuck didn't have youth or workrate. He was a world class spoiler in that fight though and that's what made it so close... Its up to a judge whether they favour spoilibg tactics or not (or whether, like you they simply just dislike brits).

The diving and play acting he did whilst calzaghe arse raped him is proof enough that the pace was just too much for the old man. Oh well, nevermind... Hopkins has done enough since to redeem the loss, I doubt he worries too much about it - you on the on the other hand still seem pathetically butt hurt by it, grow a pair.

---

Seriously man, I don't think they came any more stupider than you. And believe me that's saying a lot when you got eric's dumb ass posting on the same thread. But I doubt even he would embarrass himself and call Hopkins lazy. It doesn't even matter in what moronic way you meant it, Hopkins and the word lazy don't go together. Unless you gonna tell me you know guys in there mid 40's who are in better shape than most 20 year olds and can compete with boxings elite than you can't call Hopkins lazy. I don't doubt you know a bunch 40 year old men. But I call bullshit if you gonna claim they can compete with boxings elite.

And it doesn't matter what Calzaghe and Hopkins did and didn't do to win and lose there fight. Bottom line is it was a close fight that left a lot of unfinished business which Calzaghe refused to clear up cuz he knew in his heart that he got a gift win. I told you about a million times before. Facts don't fucking lie. Which is why I only deal in facts. You should to. But no. You refuse to accept them? Why? Does your lust for Calzaghe burn that intensively? Do you even know what a fact actually means? Come on. Tell me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yes, again as shocking as it may sound - some people may not agree with your narrow, blinkered way of thinking.

I think if Calzaghe was a natural 154lb fighter and Hopkins wasn't so fucking lazy in that fight he would have pulled out the win. But he didn't, boo hoo :rolleyes:

Hopkins didn't have size on his side like he had in his precious big fights and he sure as fuck didn't have youth or workrate. He was a world class spoiler in that fight though and that's what made it so close... Its up to a judge whether they favour spoilibg tactics or not (or whether, like you they simply just dislike brits).

The diving and play acting he did whilst calzaghe arse raped him is proof enough that the pace was just too much for the old man. Oh well, nevermind... Hopkins has done enough since to redeem the loss, I doubt he worries too much about it - you on the on the other hand still seem pathetically butt hurt by it, grow a pair.

---

Seriously man, I don't think they came any more stupider than you. And believe me that's saying a lot when you got eric's dumb ass posting on the same thread. But I doubt even he would embarrass himself and call Hopkins lazy. It doesn't even matter in what moronic way you meant it, Hopkins and the word lazy don't go together. Unless you gonna tell me you know guys in there mid 40's who are in better shape than most 20 year olds and can compete with boxings elite than you can't call Hopkins lazy. I don't doubt you know a bunch 40 year old men. But I call bullshit if you gonna claim they can compete with boxings elite.

And it doesn't matter what Calzaghe and Hopkins did and didn't do to win and lose there fight. Bottom line is it was a close fight that left a lot of unfinished business which Calzaghe refused to clear up cuz he knew in his heart that he got a gift win. I told you about a million times before. Facts don't fucking lie. Which is why I only deal in facts. You should to. But no. You refuse to accept them? Why? Does your lust for Calzaghe burn that intensively? Do you even know what a fact actually means? Come on. Tell me.

---

Thing is youre still behind on the score cards in this one big man

You might be a bit more "in the running" if you didnt keep saying how you only deal with the facts and then say how hurt Calzaghe was through out the fight - which ever way you think the fight went neither man was visibly hurt at any time ;D