Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
I don't care if Calzaghe get's to a 100-0. He's not that great. He's just lucky that there’s not a dominant fighter at his peak near his weight division. There is not a Mayweather or Cotto or a Pacquiao. The fact is he barely eked out a decision against a 43 Hopkins is not a sign of greatness. Imagine what a 33 year old Hopkins would have done to him ? Would Calzaghe have beaten a peak James Toney ? Roy Jones ? Nigel Benn ? Gerald McClellan ? I'm not so sure.
To be honest if it came to a close decision than Hopkins would lose regardless. Boxing needs to protect their assets. Brits are acquainted to having "their champs" get destroyed by fighters from the states and they couldn't allow a 40+ old boxer from the states beat a young British fighter. Also boxing elitists are in a state of shock of the growth of MMA. That's why they can't allow 40+ old boxer to beat all the young guys; it will only expose how shallow boxing is talent wise amongst 99% of boxers
Finally people say Pavlik is the guy to beat him. I don't rate flat footed Pavlik that highly. I think Calzaghe beats him and beats him easy. Ironically I think the man to beat him is the guy that was beaten twice by Pavlik and that's Jermain Taylor. I think his fast hands and speed will beat Calzaghe.
Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
I don't care if Calzaghe get's to a 100-0. He's not that great. He's just lucky that there’s not a dominant fighter at his peak near his weight division. There is not a Mayweather or Cotto or a Pacquiao. The fact is he barely eked out a decision against a 43 Hopkins is not a sign of greatness. Imagine what a 33 year old Hopkins would have done to him ? Would Calzaghe have beaten a peak James Toney ? Roy Jones ? Nigel Benn ? Gerald McClellan ? I'm not so sure.
To be honest if it came to a close decision than Hopkins would lose regardless. Boxing needs to protect their assets. Brits are acquainted to having "their champs" get destroyed by fighters from the states and they couldn't allow a 40+ old boxer from the states beat a young British fighter. Also boxing elitists are in a state of shock of the growth of MMA. That's why they can't allow 40+ old boxer to beat all the young guys; it will only expose how shallow boxing is talent wise amongst 99% of boxers
Finally people say Pavlik is the guy to beat him. I don't rate flat footed Pavlik that highly. I think Calzaghe beats him and beats him easy. Ironically I think the man to beat him is the guy that was beaten twice by Pavlik and that's Jermain Taylor. I think his fast hands and speed will beat Calzaghe.
So somehow hopkins would fight differently? if he did jc would catch him more often...the only reason why bop looked good was because he fought like he always does, running away and counter punching.
Jc is 36 himself don't forget...the same could be said for him...If he was 26 he would whoop bhop's arse..get over it...it's all about styles. The guys you speak of would be comprehensevly beaten by jc on points..
Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Last Saturday I think Joe finally silenced all the doubters. He acquited himself well despite presenting a sub-par "boxing perform,ance.
He showed grit, determination and resiliance in overcoming the old master Hopkins and I felt that his career had been at last legitimised and he had proved all he needed to. It was an incredibly close fight, with Joe just edging it, considering the knockdown. I feel the judges were not very enthused by the tactics Hopkins employed. It was a victory for boxing as the more active and aggresive fighter was favoured over the fighter who employed foul tactics to supplement his ring generalship.
However, I'm not excited at the thought of another Calzaghe fight. I think he has taken tough fights in recent times, overcame the obstacles he's been presented with and no longer needs to fight for his legacy.
However, coming offf fights such as Lacy, Bika, Manfredo, Kessler and Hopkins I acknowledge that it will be difficult to leave at a time that is proving more fruitful finacncially than any other time in his career.
Should Joe leave now, he cannot come back in a few years because of his advanced age. This fact suggests that he may indeed fight on for a couple of more fights.
Joe has proved that he is a great fighter. No longer a good fighter, a great fighter. At times when the referee seemed to be aganst him, his corner was in disarray and panic and the crowd were near silenced, he soldieried on.
In rounds he seemed to lose early in the fight, he still rallied to the final bell, knowing he did not score the round, but choosing to fight regardless.Rising from the knockdown Joe illustrated his quality, not only in the manner that he arose, but also by learning from his mistake and preventing a reoccurence later in the fight.
Great fight Joe, but you have done enough, there is no need to continue, you've proved enough.
How? By beating a middle aged man. He needs to take a Pavlik, Taylor , Miranda, or some one who is young and very deadly. If he does not I will still think he is a padded champ with one good win on his record. And that win is controversial. He couldnt hurt Hopkins and Hopkins hurt him and put him on his ass.
Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GodofBoxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
I don't care if Calzaghe get's to a 100-0. He's not that great. He's just lucky that there’s not a dominant fighter at his peak near his weight division. There is not a Mayweather or Cotto or a Pacquiao. The fact is he barely eked out a decision against a 43 Hopkins is not a sign of greatness. Imagine what a 33 year old Hopkins would have done to him ? Would Calzaghe have beaten a peak James Toney ? Roy Jones ? Nigel Benn ? Gerald McClellan ? I'm not so sure.
To be honest if it came to a close decision than Hopkins would lose regardless. Boxing needs to protect their assets. Brits are acquainted to having "their champs" get destroyed by fighters from the states and they couldn't allow a 40+ old boxer from the states beat a young British fighter. Also boxing elitists are in a state of shock of the growth of MMA. That's why they can't allow 40+ old boxer to beat all the young guys; it will only expose how shallow boxing is talent wise amongst 99% of boxers
Finally people say Pavlik is the guy to beat him. I don't rate flat footed Pavlik that highly. I think Calzaghe beats him and beats him easy. Ironically I think the man to beat him is the guy that was beaten twice by Pavlik and that's Jermain Taylor. I think his fast hands and speed will beat Calzaghe.
So somehow hopkins would fight differently? if he did jc would catch him more often...the only reason why bop looked good was because he fought like he always does, running away and counter punching.
Jc is 36 himself don't forget...the same could be said for him...If he was 26 he would whoop bhop's arse..get over it...it's all about styles. The guys you speak of would be comprehensevly beaten by jc on points..
No one even heard of Calzaghe back then due to the bums he was fighting. He never fought Roy Jones years ago in his prime. I wouldn't want to be embarrassed either.
Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
I didn't mean funny like that you know exactly what i meant Donny :rolleyes:
I may of mentioned punch stats in the past but i can't remember that far back, but all i know is that in the last 6 months i have disregarded them as inaccurate stat, because i have learnt more about them in the last 6 months.
I don't see how thats disrespecting Calzaghe ?? i already gave him his credit but most of his flurries in Hopkins fight were slapping punches and i describe them as pitter patter, which way should i describe them ?? "Devastating powerful flurries" ??
And yes actually i have broken my hand not badly but yes, and with that comment your implying im blaming Calzaghe right ?? well your wrong again im not discrediting Calzaghe for his flurries i know how painful it is, but they are still pitter patter slapping punches end of.
I know exactly what you were talking about.
In exactly the same way you knew what I was talking about when I said that you had used punch stats on numerous occasions. Yet you denied that.
No matter.
If a novice was at ringside during one of your fights, a guy you considered a lesser boxer than yourself and he called you a pitty pat puncher, would you feel offended?
So if you have broken your hand you realise that mentally, you are always concious of breaking it again.
You always worry, you'll be throwing a punch and you'll feel that horrible crack again and you will be disabled for the remaining duration of the fight.
Would you not arm punch also if you were concious of this in every fight?
In addition add Hopkins. A man with a hrad head. Try hitting your toughest sparring partner square on in the forehead. It hurts trust me.
All you did is say exactly what i was trying to say Donny, if you look at my post didn't i say it wasn't Calzaghe's fault ?? i know exactly what he is going through. But that doesn't change the fact that they are slapping punches end of, i don't really understand why you consider pitter patter offensive and not slapping, i really don't know what other way i can explain it ?? thats just an expression Donny its not meant to be offensive.
But you see punches are punches. Whether the connect hard, soft or somewhere in between they score.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
southakron314
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
Last Saturday I think Joe finally silenced all the doubters. He acquited himself well despite presenting a sub-par "boxing perform,ance.
He showed grit, determination and resiliance in overcoming the old master Hopkins and I felt that his career had been at last legitimised and he had proved all he needed to. It was an incredibly close fight, with Joe just edging it, considering the knockdown. I feel the judges were not very enthused by the tactics Hopkins employed. It was a victory for boxing as the more active and aggresive fighter was favoured over the fighter who employed foul tactics to supplement his ring generalship.
However, I'm not excited at the thought of another Calzaghe fight. I think he has taken tough fights in recent times, overcame the obstacles he's been presented with and no longer needs to fight for his legacy.
However, coming offf fights such as Lacy, Bika, Manfredo, Kessler and Hopkins I acknowledge that it will be difficult to leave at a time that is proving more fruitful finacncially than any other time in his career.
Should Joe leave now, he cannot come back in a few years because of his advanced age. This fact suggests that he may indeed fight on for a couple of more fights.
Joe has proved that he is a great fighter. No longer a good fighter, a great fighter. At times when the referee seemed to be aganst him, his corner was in disarray and panic and the crowd were near silenced, he soldieried on.
In rounds he seemed to lose early in the fight, he still rallied to the final bell, knowing he did not score the round, but choosing to fight regardless.Rising from the knockdown Joe illustrated his quality, not only in the manner that he arose, but also by learning from his mistake and preventing a reoccurence later in the fight.
Great fight Joe, but you have done enough, there is no need to continue, you've proved enough.
How? By beating a middle aged man. He needs to take a Pavlik, Taylor , Miranda, or some one who is young and very deadly. If he does not I will still think he is a padded champ with one good win on his record. And that win is controversial. He couldnt hurt Hopkins and Hopkins hurt him and put him on his ass.
One good win? Are you serious?
Before the Lacy fight, Calzaghe was feared for.
He exposed Jeff.
Before the Kessler fight, Kessler was touted as a Great White on legs and remains a huge prospect.
Calzaghe beat him comprehensively.
Before the Hopkins fight, Hopkins was touteed as a somewhat aged great who would outclass Calzaghe.
As I've alluded to before. If you want to see people hurt go streeet fighting.
This is boxing, a game based on a points system, not on pain threshholds.
One good win:mad:
Re: I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
I don't care if Calzaghe get's to a 100-0. He's not that great. He's just lucky that there’s not a dominant fighter at his peak near his weight division. There is not a Mayweather or Cotto or a Pacquiao. The fact is he barely eked out a decision against a 43 Hopkins is not a sign of greatness. Imagine what a 33 year old Hopkins would have done to him ? Would Calzaghe have beaten a peak James Toney ? Roy Jones ? Nigel Benn ? Gerald McClellan ? I'm not so sure.
To be honest if it came to a close decision than Hopkins would lose regardless. Boxing needs to protect their assets. Brits are acquainted to having "their champs" get destroyed by fighters from the states and they couldn't allow a 40+ old boxer from the states beat a young British fighter. Also boxing elitists are in a state of shock of the growth of MMA. That's why they can't allow 40+ old boxer to beat all the young guys; it will only expose how shallow boxing is talent wise amongst 99% of boxers
Finally people say Pavlik is the guy to beat him. I don't rate flat footed Pavlik that highly. I think Calzaghe beats him and beats him easy. Ironically I think the man to beat him is the guy that was beaten twice by Pavlik and that's Jermain Taylor. I think his fast hands and speed will beat Calzaghe.
There we go again with the "if my boy was younger he'd have beaten you" excuse. :rolleyes:
