Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
armin
I had calzaghe winning easy by a few points wasn't even close imo
^^ This...
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
armin
I had calzaghe winning easy by a few points wasn't even close imo
Well it must of been close considering fans 4 years later still post threads asking who we think won the fight.
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pugilistic
Quote:
Originally Posted by
armin
I had calzaghe winning easy by a few points wasn't even close imo
Well it must of been close considering fans 4 years later still post threads asking who we think won the fight.
It's one of those strange fights that people have a bunch of wildly varying views on and they're all convinced they're right.
Like myself, I've watched the fight three times and I don't understand how anyone can say Calzaghe won it easily. He did nothing effective and landed almost no punches all fight. He just madly slapped at the air while Hopkins, IMO, made him look somewhat foolish. On the other hand, someone will undoubtedly call me all sorts of horrible names, deride my boxing knowledge, and possibly question my sexuality for having this opinion.
I loathe Hopkins and was cheering for Calzaghe too, for whatever that is worth.
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Not bitter at all, bro. But i HAVE seen more meaningful combinations thrown by middle-aged women fighting over a Kmart "blue-light special".
That sounds bitter
As Alan Partridge would say 'Bunch of bitter bastards'. The Hopkins crew has never gotten over this loss. And again as Alan would say 'It's just sad'. A wise man is old Alan.
The "Hopkins crew"? Oh no, bro.... don't lump me in with that bunch. Not a Hopkins fan by any stretch of the imagination (and not just 'cause he beat Tito). :)
I admire Hopkins' longevity in the sport, and everything he's accomplished. But by no means am I a Hopkins fan. I'm just commenting on the "flurry" by Calzaghe on Manfredo. You gotta admit..... there's a lot of slapping going on in there.
:)
It was a poor stoppage. A crap fight too, I was against it from the start.
If I remember correctly you were all for it. Calling it one of Calzaghe's greatest threats at the time. Sadly you were right on that account
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pugilistic
Quote:
Originally Posted by
armin
I had calzaghe winning easy by a few points wasn't even close imo
Well it must of been close considering fans 4 years later still post threads asking who we think won the fight.
It's one of those strange fights that people have a bunch of wildly varying views on and they're all convinced they're right.
Like myself, I've watched the fight three times and I don't understand how anyone can say Calzaghe one is easily. He did nothing effective and landed almost no punches all fight. He just madly slapped at the air while Hopkins, IMO, made him look somewhat foolish.
I saw the same fight you did. And I also do not understand for a second how anyone can say it was "decisive" or "clear" for Calzaghe. He didn't even get three judges. The amount of Calzaghe dicksucking from the Brits is beyond embarrassing.
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Althugz
That post is utter bollox mate sorry, there isnt any point in trying to reply, honestly man read it back, there is no fact in there at all, read it back and tell me you dont sound bitter
I just read it back...Perhaps we are reading different posts..
It was his 43rd fight - FACT
Everybody I personally know in the boxing community thought Hopkins won - FACT
Brits will automatically be biased towards Brits, Mexicans towards Mexicans etc - FACT
It was his greatest victory - FACT (MAYBE you can make a case for Kessler being his best victory but that's just as bad)
The only thing I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that he sucks balls but I'm working on it
Let's read your post back :
It was an easy fight to score - Opinion
Calzaghe won easily 8-4 - Opinion
I don't know how anyone can have Hopkins winning this fight - Opinion
Need I go on?? No...you simply can't reply to my post because you have no answer..*sigh* Calzaghe fans :rolleyes:
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Althugz
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Althugz
That post is utter bollox mate sorry, there isnt any point in trying to reply, honestly man read it back, there is no fact in there at all, read it back and tell me you dont sound bitter
I just read it back...Perhaps we are reading different posts..
It was his 43rd fight - FACT
Everybody I personally know in the boxing community thought Hopkins won - FACT
Brits will automatically be biased towards Brits, Mexicans towards Mexicans etc - FACT
It was his greatest victory - FACT (MAYBE you can make a case for Kessler being his best victory but that's just as bad)
The only thing I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that he sucks balls but I'm working on it
Let's read your post back :
It was an easy fight to score - Opinion
Calzaghe won easily 8-4 - Opinion
I don't know how anyone can have Hopkins winning this fight - Opinion
Need I go on?? No...you simply can't reply to my post because you have no answer..*sigh* Calzaghe fans :rolleyes:
You can't change History,and that a FACT.?;D
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
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 :)
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
by the way, you youtube it and pick any of the last 8 rounds, pick hopkins best out of those 8
and lets duscuss it :)
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
by the way, you youtube it and pick any of the last 8 rounds, pick hopkins best out of those 8
and lets duscuss it :)
You no something erics, all way's like the word UNDEFEATED, not many people can put that at the side
of there name, I wonder could RJJ or Bernardo no, but I no a man that CAN and that's a FACT.?;D
Re: 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.
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
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.
Re: Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Calzaghe I and result of a hypothetical rematch
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.
