Re: Prime Calzaghe vs Golovkin
Well if you look at there best wins with Hopkins you got Taver,Pascal,Tito, and Johnson then you have Calzaghe with Hopkins, Kessler, Reid and Lacy looks to pretty even but Hopkins even at his age better win then those guys. They both have 10 year dominate reigns in there division both have been lineal champs in a few divisions there pretty much the same. The more i look at it the more i side with Calzaghe never lost and he has better wins in his division Kessler was better then anyone hop faced in mw and beating Hopkins at lhw is better then any win Hopkins has at lhw.
Re: Prime Calzaghe vs Golovkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Well if you look at there best wins with Hopkins you got Taver,Pascal,Tito, and Johnson then you have Calzaghe with Hopkins, Kessler, Reid and Lacy looks to pretty even but Hopkins even at his age better win then those guys. They both have 10 year dominate reigns in there division both have been lineal champs in a few divisions there pretty much the same. The more i look at it the more i side with Calzaghe never lost and he has better wins in his division Kessler was better then anyone hop faced in mw and beating Hopkins at lhw is better then any win Hopkins has at lhw.
Hopkins and Calzaghe is an extremely difficult fight to score imo, for two guys that good it was a bad fight and basically every single effective punch was landed by Hopkins. I don't know who would have won in their primes, but I don't think you can argue that Hopkins faced the better form throughout his career. Your argument basically boils down to your last point, which is silly to begin with, more so considering there wasn't a clear winner between them.
Re: Prime Calzaghe vs Golovkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Well if you look at there best wins with Hopkins you got Taver,Pascal,Tito, and Johnson then you have Calzaghe with Hopkins, Kessler, Reid and Lacy looks to pretty even but Hopkins even at his age better win then those guys. They both have 10 year dominate reigns in there division both have been lineal champs in a few divisions there pretty much the same. The more i look at it the more i side with Calzaghe never lost and he has better wins in his division Kessler was better then anyone hop faced in mw and beating Hopkins at lhw is better then any win Hopkins has at lhw.
Hopkins and Calzaghe is an extremely difficult fight to score imo, for two guys that good it was a bad fight and basically every single effective punch was landed by Hopkins. I don't know who would have won in their primes, but I don't think you can argue that Hopkins faced the better form throughout his career. Your argument basically boils down to your last point, which is silly to begin with, more so considering there wasn't a clear winner between them.
From all the polls i have seen most had Calzaghe winning it was a close fight and i can not see how Hopkins won a round after first few because he through nothing. Also Kessler is better smw then any guy i can think of that Hopkins beat at mw. Outside of that they dominated weak division for a decade i just gave Calzaghe the edge because he never lost and i think he did enough against hopkins to win and it is a official win for him. There comp outside a few are the same there careers are very similar i really do not care either way but people act like Hops in another league do not see it.
