Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bx730NY
I can't believe how delirious Bernard and some of you guys are. That fight wasn't even close and would have been even worse for hopkins had he not faked getting hit low and took the 5 minute break.
He was being dominated in every aspect of the game and as usual, resorted to his dirty tactics. Imagine if the ref would have done his job how the scores would have really looked. He got away with murder last night and is the biggest sore loser in boxing.
He consistently hit one or two low blows on the break, headbutted, faked like he got hit low, turned Joe around and hit him from behind and held on just to try to make it close.
If anything, it just shows how great of a fighter Joe is for not loosing his cool and still dominating him despite getting no help from the ref.
Joe Calzaghe P4P #1 fighter in the WORLD!!!
I agree with everything here, except for the last line. Calzaghe clearly won the fight. No one has ever looked good against Hopkins, so just winning the fight is impressive enough.
Roy looked way better against Hopkins, Also even Winky looked better, didn't take the big punches Calzaghe did, he landed much more solid punches on Hopkins.... overall regardless of scorecards I felt Winky put on a better performance against B-Hop in terms of fighting his style and landing the punches cleanly.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bx730NY
I can't believe how delirious Bernard and some of you guys are. That fight wasn't even close and would have been even worse for hopkins had he not faked getting hit low and took the 5 minute break.
He was being dominated in every aspect of the game and as usual, resorted to his dirty tactics. Imagine if the ref would have done his job how the scores would have really looked. He got away with murder last night and is the biggest sore loser in boxing.
He consistently hit one or two low blows on the break, headbutted, faked like he got hit low, turned Joe around and hit him from behind and held on just to try to make it close.
If anything, it just shows how great of a fighter Joe is for not loosing his cool and still dominating him despite getting no help from the ref.
Joe Calzaghe P4P #1 fighter in the WORLD!!!
I agree with everything here, except for the last line. Calzaghe clearly won the fight. No one has ever looked good against Hopkins, so just winning the fight is impressive enough.
Roy looked way better against Hopkins, Also even Winky looked better, didn't take the big punches Calzaghe did, he landed much more solid punches on Hopkins.... overall regardless of scorecards
I felt Winky put on a better performance against B-Hop in terms of fighting his style and landing the punches cleanly.
LOL are you even serious? :o
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I selected Joe to win by UD against Hopkins but i was far from impressed, Hopkins is a difficult opponent and i really don't like watching him much. Jones Jr will be a different story and Joe will have to improve on that performance to beat RJJ. I give Jones a good chance of upsetting Calzaghe.
I agree.
But if i look at the fights all great fighters have had against nard, they all end up looking either crap wins or getting ko'd or lose themselves.
RJJ didnt beat him comdortably and taylor's wins were v controversial (exceptionally so the first time)...coupled that bernard easily beat winky and totally shut out tarver, it kind of puts it in perspective.
JC vs RJJ will be a different style of fight (thankfully), 2 styles where fireworks are garunteed when they clash.
Id say that if RJJ is totally up for this one then it will be very difficult for calzaghe. If RJJ is how he is in his prime then id favour him to win, but i dont think either fighter is in their prime anymore sadly (i think we saw prime RJJ 6 years back and prime JC 2 years back)...but its only 1 fight. Calzaghe will have to be on great form to beat jones who will obviously be very 'up for it'.
I'll give it 60/40 to calzaghe in this case. The 40% to jones because jones can catch calzaghe and cause him problems aswell, wouldnt come as a shock if jones won, but im favouring joe.
Hopkins proved by his close loss to joe that he is a great boxer, and still at 43 a great athlete and a sure hall of famer.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JLAQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap
H I had Joe 2up winning down the straight in a terrible fight. There was only one guy trying to fight. As per usual Hopkins trying to mug without effort to me thats mugging the Sport I love, and its certainly not the first time its happened.Boxing without integraty, no time for it.
Yeah, this beloved sport of ours was conceived in liberty and goodwill. The founding fathers never envisoned a boxer who fought dirty, talked dirty, and looked dirty. Nard just has to go, considering this and the fact that he bores the hell out of people watching the sport. :cool:
The founding fathers beat the hell out of each other bareknuckle, were known to kick, grapple and gouge at any given opportunity and regulkarly left the opponent blinded or even bleeding to death.
An early hero of the "founding father's the Boston Strongboy John L. Sullivan used to burst into Bars claiming that he would "whup any motherfucker in the house" and who was often drunk in his fights.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JLAQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap
H I had Joe 2up winning down the straight in a terrible fight. There was only one guy trying to fight. As per usual Hopkins trying to mug without effort to me thats mugging the Sport I love, and its certainly not the first time its happened.Boxing without integraty, no time for it.
Yeah, this beloved sport of ours was conceived in liberty and goodwill. The founding fathers never envisoned a boxer who fought dirty, talked dirty, and looked dirty. Nard just has to go, considering this and the fact that he bores the hell out of people watching the sport. :cool:
The founding fathers beat the hell out of each other bareknuckle, were known to kick, grapple and gouge at any given opportunity and regulkarly left the opponent blinded or even bleeding to death.
An early hero of the "founding father's the Boston Strongboy John L. Sullivan used to burst into Bars claiming that he would "whup any motherfucker in the house" and who was often drunk in his fights.
Sounds a lot like JT... Only difference is the verbage
JT: "I'll fingerbang any mutha fuckin dude in the house..."
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PRIDE OF BOSTON
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JLAQ
Yeah, this beloved sport of ours was conceived in liberty and goodwill. The founding fathers never envisoned a boxer who fought dirty, talked dirty, and looked dirty. Nard just has to go, considering this and the fact that he bores the hell out of people watching the sport. :cool:
The founding fathers beat the hell out of each other bareknuckle, were known to kick, grapple and gouge at any given opportunity and regulkarly left the opponent blinded or even bleeding to death.
An early hero of the "founding father's the Boston Strongboy John L. Sullivan used to burst into Bars claiming that he would "whup any motherfucker in the house" and who was often drunk in his fights.
Sounds a lot like JT... Only difference is the verbage
JT: "I'll fingerbang any mutha fuckin dude in the house..."
Whoa that was a good one!
bIG LEFT HOOK FROM pRIDE!!!
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PRIDE OF BOSTON
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
The founding fathers beat the hell out of each other bareknuckle, were known to kick, grapple and gouge at any given opportunity and regulkarly left the opponent blinded or even bleeding to death.
An early hero of the "founding father's the Boston Strongboy John L. Sullivan used to burst into Bars claiming that he would "whup any motherfucker in the house" and who was often drunk in his fights.
Sounds a lot like JT... Only difference is the verbage
JT: "I'll fingerbang any mutha fuckin dude in the house..."
Whoa that was a good one!
bIG LEFT HOOK FROM pRIDE!!!
LOL;D
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PRIDE OF BOSTON
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JLAQ
Yeah, this beloved sport of ours was conceived in liberty and goodwill. The founding fathers never envisoned a boxer who fought dirty, talked dirty, and looked dirty. Nard just has to go, considering this and the fact that he bores the hell out of people watching the sport. :cool:
The founding fathers beat the hell out of each other bareknuckle, were known to kick, grapple and gouge at any given opportunity and regulkarly left the opponent blinded or even bleeding to death.
An early hero of the "founding father's the Boston Strongboy John L. Sullivan used to burst into Bars claiming that he would "whup any motherfucker in the house" and who was often drunk in his fights.
Sounds a lot like JT... Only difference is the verbage
JT: "I'll fingerbang any mutha fuckin dude in the house..."
;D
A quick prediction from me... if JC fight Jones in Wales he'll win inside the distance. Would have been a totally different fight against Jones a few years back but... JC fighting probably his last fight and in front of his home crowd against a questionably shot Roy Jones will result in a late stoppage win...
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
All this fuss about Cortez not letting Hatton hold and hit. The ref could have left, and the outcome would have been the same. In the post fight interview, Hatton aknowledged that Floyd was extremely better on the inside than what he expected, just because Cortez didn't let Hatton tackle Floyd, doesn't mean he did a bad job. People want to bitch about the ref helped Floyd, and at the same time, they say well, Hatton is not a p4p fighter at 147, call the wahmbulance. Which is it? Either Hatton isn't that good, or Cortez helped Floyd? What a bunch of BS. As for the Joe-BHOP fight, both fighters got away with alot of crap. I don't think Joe Cortez is a great Ref, but I didn't see him favor either fighter. If he called a foul on BHOP, he would have had to call a foul on Joe. He probably should have made a point early with BHOP, but when he didn't, he knew he couldn't fault Joe later. As I said, both fighters got away with stuff, and neither got a point deducted, so it worked out good.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LondonBB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I selected Joe to win by UD against Hopkins but i was far from impressed, Hopkins is a difficult opponent and i really don't like watching him much. Jones Jr will be a different story and Joe will have to improve on that performance to beat RJJ. I give Jones a good chance of upsetting Calzaghe.
I agree.
But if i look at the fights all great fighters have had against nard, they all end up looking either crap wins or getting ko'd or lose themselves.
RJJ didnt beat him comdortably and taylor's wins were v controversial (exceptionally so the first time)...coupled that bernard easily beat winky and totally shut out tarver, it kind of puts it in perspective.
JC vs RJJ will be a different style of fight (thankfully), 2 styles where fireworks are garunteed when they clash.
Id say that if RJJ is totally up for this one then it will be very difficult for calzaghe. If RJJ is how he is in his prime then id favour him to win, but i dont think either fighter is in their prime anymore sadly (i think we saw prime RJJ 6 years back and prime JC 2 years back)...but its only 1 fight. Calzaghe will have to be on great form to beat jones who will obviously be very 'up for it'.
I'll give it 60/40 to calzaghe in this case. The 40% to jones because jones can catch calzaghe and cause him problems aswell, wouldnt come as a shock if jones won, but im favouring joe.
Hopkins proved by his close loss to joe that he is a great boxer, and still at 43 a great athlete and a sure hall of famer.
Roy didn't beat who comfortably? IF your tlaking about Bernard HOpkins he was so sure he was going to win that he gave away the last two roudns to protect his hand, and he still won 116-112, and thus he wanted to it probably owuld have been 118-110
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
I wouldn't say ordinary, but he didn't look his best. I don't think anyone has looked great against Hopkins, so Calzaghe shouldn't get too much heat for B-Hop's style of fight. My only complaint about Calzaghe is his technique when he throws those flurries otherwise he's a slick boxer with fast hands and great defense.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LondonBB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I selected Joe to win by UD against Hopkins but i was far from impressed, Hopkins is a difficult opponent and i really don't like watching him much. Jones Jr will be a different story and Joe will have to improve on that performance to beat RJJ. I give Jones a good chance of upsetting Calzaghe.
I agree.
But if i look at the fights all great fighters have had against nard, they all end up looking either crap wins or getting ko'd or lose themselves.
RJJ didnt beat him comdortably and taylor's wins were v controversial (exceptionally so the first time)...coupled that bernard easily beat winky and totally shut out tarver, it kind of puts it in perspective.
JC vs RJJ will be a different style of fight (thankfully), 2 styles where fireworks are garunteed when they clash.
Id say that if RJJ is totally up for this one then it will be very difficult for calzaghe. If RJJ is how he is in his prime then id favour him to win, but i dont think either fighter is in their prime anymore sadly (i think we saw prime RJJ 6 years back and prime JC 2 years back)...but its only 1 fight. Calzaghe will have to be on great form to beat jones who will obviously be very 'up for it'.
I'll give it 60/40 to calzaghe in this case. The 40% to jones because jones can catch calzaghe and cause him problems aswell, wouldnt come as a shock if jones won, but im favouring joe.
Hopkins proved by his close loss to joe that he is a great boxer, and still at 43 a great athlete and a sure hall of famer.
Roy didn't beat who comfortably? IF your tlaking about Bernard HOpkins he was so sure he was going to win that he gave away the last two roudns to protect his hand, and he still won 116-112, and thus he wanted to it probably owuld have been 118-110
heh your gonna hate me , but I scored that RJJ fight for B-Hop, go figure ;)
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Nope, i'm not nuts, not today anyway. I watched the fight again and no doubt Hopkins style made Calzaghe look ordinary in this fight but i also think Joe is ordinary anyway, his win against Kessler certainly impressed me but i would like to see him do it again and not fight these old well past there best legends. Jones jr will give Calzaghe a tough time but expect JC to win.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bx730NY
I can't believe how delirious Bernard and some of you guys are. That fight wasn't even close and would have been even worse for hopkins had he not faked getting hit low and took the 5 minute break.
He was being dominated in every aspect of the game and as usual, resorted to his dirty tactics. Imagine if the ref would have done his job how the scores would have really looked. He got away with murder last night and is the biggest sore loser in boxing.
He consistently hit one or two low blows on the break, headbutted, faked like he got hit low, turned Joe around and hit him from behind and held on just to try to make it close.
If anything, it just shows how great of a fighter Joe is for not loosing his cool and still dominating him despite getting no help from the ref.
Joe Calzaghe P4P #1 fighter in the WORLD!!!
I agree with everything here, except for the last line. Calzaghe clearly won the fight. No one has ever looked good against Hopkins, so just winning the fight is impressive enough.
Roy looked way better against Hopkins, Also even Winky looked better, didn't take the big punches Calzaghe did, he landed much more solid punches on Hopkins.... overall regardless of scorecards I felt Winky put on a better performance against B-Hop in terms of fighting his style and landing the punches cleanly.
When did I ever say that Calzaghe looked better against Hopkins than Roy did?
I simply said that no one has ever looked good against Hopkins. Roy beat Hopkins, he beat him more clearly than Calzaghe did, but he didn't look impressive. Hopkins' style doesn't allow you to show off your skills.
Re: Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unknowndonor
All this fuss about Cortez not letting Hatton hold and hit. The ref could have left, and the outcome would have been the same. In the post fight interview, Hatton aknowledged that Floyd was extremely better on the inside than what he expected, just because Cortez didn't let Hatton tackle Floyd, doesn't mean he did a bad job. People want to bitch about the ref helped Floyd, and at the same time, they say well, Hatton is not a p4p fighter at 147, call the wahmbulance. Which is it? Either Hatton isn't that good, or Cortez helped Floyd? What a bunch of BS. As for the Joe-BHOP fight, both fighters got away with alot of crap. I don't think Joe Cortez is a great Ref, but I didn't see him favor either fighter. If he called a foul on BHOP, he would have had to call a foul on Joe. He probably should have made a point early with BHOP, but when he didn't, he knew he couldn't fault Joe later. As I said, both fighters got away with stuff, and neither got a point deducted, so it worked out good.
The simple fact is that Joe Cortez in the Hopkins fight illustrated that he alters his own judgement in order to facilitate certain boxing personalities.
Let's view the facts.
The very second Hatton attempted to hold Mayweather and rough him up Cortez shouted break and jumped between the fighters.
In the Hopkins fight, Hopkins suceeded in holding onto Calzaghe for long periods of time, uninterrupted by the referee, where he used the head frequently and forced Joe to bend below the waist, for twelve rounds!
The referee is there for a reason, to ensure that there is fair play and to ensure the safety of the fighters.
How can fighters place their trust in a referee who uses completely different rules for certain fighters??
