I'd like the Calzaghe victory to be the final chapter.

[Fenster]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

[ICB]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

[donnydarkoIRL]

I don't see why he shouldn't keep on fighting if he thinks he can still do it, going out with a controversial win over 43 year old Bernard Hopkins isn't a good way to go out. Although saying that Calzaghe is starting to look little worn out IMO, like i said in the other thread his combo's aren't as fast or good as they used to be, and his jab seems to be lacking the snap it used to have as well. And Fenster just because some people scored it for Hopkins doesn't mean there haters, they obviously liked the cleaner more effective punches from Hopkins like i did.

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

[donnydarkoIRL]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

So Calzaghe's punches weren't effective, but Hopkins just edged it in your book?
That doesn't really compute.

[ICB]

I don't see why he shouldn't keep on fighting if he thinks he can still do it, going out with a controversial win over 43 year old Bernard Hopkins isn't a good way to go out. Although saying that Calzaghe is starting to look little worn out IMO, like i said in the other thread his combo's aren't as fast or good as they used to be, and his jab seems to be lacking the snap it used to have as well. And Fenster just because some people scored it for Hopkins doesn't mean there haters, they obviously liked the cleaner more effective punches from Hopkins like i did.

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

[Fenster]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

Exactly! I wanted you to make that comment

All the haters scored it for Hopkins. All the Calzaghe fans obviously scored it for Calzaghe.

So who are the neutrals - CutMeMick scored it for Calzaghe. Oumafan scored it for Calzaghe. Greig scored it for Calzaghe.. find some neutrals that scored it for Hopkins?

[ICB]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

So Calzaghe's punches weren't effective, but Hopkins just edged it in your book?
That doesn't really compute.

How does that not compute ?? its pretty obvious what i said Calzaghe was mostly throwing pitter patter shots, where as Hopkins was landing solid right hands throughout most of the fight, go back and watch in slow motion how many of Calzaghe's flurries actually missed, and look back how ineffective they were. Calzaghe made it close by out working Hopkins badly in some rounds where you had no choice to give Calzaghe the round just based on sheer work rate when Hopkins got lazy and tired and his out put dropped in the later rounds.

[donnydarkoIRL]

I don't see why he shouldn't keep on fighting if he thinks he can still do it, going out with a controversial win over 43 year old Bernard Hopkins isn't a good way to go out. Although saying that Calzaghe is starting to look little worn out IMO, like i said in the other thread his combo's aren't as fast or good as they used to be, and his jab seems to be lacking the snap it used to have as well. And Fenster just because some people scored it for Hopkins doesn't mean there haters, they obviously liked the cleaner more effective punches from Hopkins like i did.

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

Round; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Hopkins 4/16 8/28 10/45 7/28 10/41 12/33 12/41 15/38 13/41 14/54 11/51 11/52
Joe.C 7/35 13/45 23/70 16/56 16/58 19/58 24/64 22/65 25/61 23/63 20/57 24/75

That gap!

[bikersk]

I don't see why he shouldn't keep on fighting if he thinks he can still do it, going out with a controversial win over 43 year old Bernard Hopkins isn't a good way to go out. Although saying that Calzaghe is starting to look little worn out IMO, like i said in the other thread his combo's aren't as fast or good as they used to be, and his jab seems to be lacking the snap it used to have as well. And Fenster just because some people scored it for Hopkins doesn't mean there haters, they obviously liked the cleaner more effective punches from Hopkins like i did.

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

Doesn't matter how solid the punch is, if it lands it scores. Sure Hopkins landed a few hard shots but that doesn't win the fight if he doesn't get the KO. Hopkins punch output was not what it needed to be to win the fight.

[ICB]

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

Round

123456789101112Hopkins4/168/2810/457/2810/4112/3312/4115/3813/4114/5411/5111/5225%29%22%25%24%36%29%39%32%26%22%21%Calzaghe7/3513/4523/7016/5616/5819/5824/6422/6525/6123/6320/5724/7520%29%33%29%28%33%38%34%41%37%35%32%

That gap!

Donny that was poorly copy and pasted i can't make that out bro, and secondly why are you using punch stats which by the looks of it you are. Why don't you just go with your own opinion and actually look back and watch how many of Calzaghe's punches missed, Calzaghe never really landed a solid hurtful shot on Hopkins until the later rounds, punch stats are very mis leading in some cases.

[ICB]

Calzaghe has said for the past 3 years or so that this is the time at which he should retire.

Cleaner more effective punching scores well when done in adequate volume. It cannot compensate for a gap as bl;atantly obvious as there was between Calzaghe and Hopkins.
Coupled with the tactics employed by Hopkins the judges scores are completely understandable and justifiable.

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

Doesn't matter how solid the punch is, if it lands it scores. Sure Hopkins landed a few hard shots but that doesn't win the fight if he doesn't get the KO. Hopkins punch output was not what it needed to be to win the fight.

Well im more of the kind of guy that scores 10 solid shots rather than 25 pitter patter shots.

[bikersk]

The rules of the sport are clear. 1 clean punch scores 1 point. 1 hard punch doesn't score more.

[Gandalf]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

You are coming across like a hater. You also picked Hopkins to win, did you not? And dont talk the rubbish about going back and forth on who would win, ultimately you picked Hopkins. When it came to the actual fight you were watching it and hoping your pick would come off. You got it wrong and yet its your arrogance that doesnt allow you to accept your pick was simply wrong. Get over it!! Seriously.

[donnydarkoIRL]

What gap ?? Calzaghe was throwing more but a lot of his punches were landing on the arms and gloves, where as Hopkins punches were much more effective and cleaner, Calzaghe never really landed a solid shot on Hopkins except some straight lefts later in the fight.

Round

123456789101112Hopkins4/168/2810/457/2810/4112/3312/4115/3813/4114/5411/5111/5225%29%22%25%24%36%29%39%32%26%22%21%Calzaghe7/3513/4523/7016/5616/5819/5824/6422/6525/6123/6320/5724/7520%29%33%29%28%33%38%34%41%37%35%32%

That gap!

Donny that was poorly copy and pasted i can't make that out bro, and secondly why are you using punch stats which by the looks of it you are. Why don't you just go with your own opinion and actually look back and watch how many of Calzaghe's punches missed, Calzaghe never really landed a solid hurtful shot on Hopkins until the later rounds, punch stats are very mis leading in some cases.

I repaired the punch stats.

And I am going by my own opinion.
A solid powershot may be worth mnore than a certain amount of lightly landing punches, but they cannot compensate for a complete lack of activity and volume.

That is not an opinion. That is a fact.

Calzaghe missed with nearly as many punches as Hopkins threw.
He landed more than Hopkins did.

[ICB]

So far Ive ONLY seen Calzaghe haters score it for Hopkins.

Im not a Calzaghe hater i don't even like Hopkins and i scored it for Hopkins based on cleaner effective punching. Calzaghe's pitter patter stuff wasn't effective and the knockdown just edged it for Hopkins IMO. And Fenster your comment is such an easy comeback for me, all i have to say is all the people that have scored it for Calzaghe that i have seen is Calzaghe fans.

You are coming across like a hater. You also picked Hopkins to win, did you not? And dont talk the rubbish about going back and forth on who would win, ultimately you picked Hopkins. When it came to the actual fight you were watching it and hoping your pick would come off. You got it wrong and yet its your arrogance that doesnt allow you to accept your pick was simply wrong. Get over it!! Seriously.

I said Hopkins by controversial decision meaning i didn't think Calzaghe would get the nod in a close fight. I was shocked Calzaghe got the nod against Hopkins to be honest in such a close fight as well. And Miles you were also badly wrong was you not ?? you picked Calzaghe to dominate Hopkins and i told you no one dominates Hopkins and it would comeback to haunt you. But everything i said before the fight was correct regarding the tactics of the fight.