Hopkins says he will retire if he can't get rematch with Calzaghe

[ICB]

Oh no, I agree mate, but say Calzaghe beat Dawson, how long would it take for him to beat a top guy after that?

Joe would still be in question till Dawson did something special

I agree that might happen & there is always going to be a new young guy for a top fighter. The problem is he still doesn't have ENOUGH quality names on his record, and I think you can only argue that one of those fighters was a top-tier, prime fighter & that's Kessler. Eubank, Hopkins & Jones Jr were all some way past their peak, whilst Lacy & Reid were just frankly not on the same level as Joe. Anyone who's knows a bit about boxing can tell just how good Dawson is. The fact is if he won that fight than I think it would kill off a lot of the doubts that remain about him. It would at least add another top name to gloss over fighting the likes of Tocker Pudwill, Jimenez & Mario Veit (TWICE!)

That's exactly what many people said before he beat Lacy... and then before Kessler... and then before Hopkins... and then even before old Roy

Who said that about and old RJJ ? alot of people were calling that fight a farce including myself. People were "hoping" RJJ would win. But many people knew RJJ was a shot fighter and that it was a pointless fight, considering RJJ hadn't had a good performance at Light Heavyweight since 2002.

Don't even get me started on Jeff Lacy, the same Jeff Lacy who went life and death with Omar Sheika, and a desperate struggle against Syd Vanderpool. All before the Joe Calzaghe fight, the only reason Jeff Lacy got hype was because he beat an old shot Robin Reid.

Who gave Joe Calzaghe a tough fight, so boxing fans thought if he beat Robin Reid easily he surely will beat Joe Calzaghe, i certainly did not though. Also because he was American and the American's hadn't had a good Super Middleweight in quite sometime, hence where all the hype come from.

I only give Joe Calzaghe credit for his wins against Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, in recent years. Because Mikkel Kessler was a good fighter, and it was a fight between the 2 best Super Middleweights in the world. And Mikkel Kessler had some good world championship experience aswell as good technical skills.

But you could even argue Mikkel Kessler was overhyped, because his best win was arguably against Anthony Mundine. Who was one of Sven Ottke's 1 punch KO victims who basically couldn't KO Mini-Me on Big Brother. I don't think that way but you could easily make that argument.

And Bernard Hopkins is a very good fighter at 43, so Joe Calzaghe does deserve credit. But you cannot be in your prime at 43, and i don't think Joe Calzaghe won the fight anyway. And had it been against the Bernard Hopkins of the late 90s, i think Bernard Hopkins would of won.

few last comments Joe Calzaghe is a very good fighter, one of the best British fighters for years. But i just don't get that special feeling when i watch Joe Calzaghe, like i do when i watch Pernell Whitaker, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, Ricardo Lopez, ETC.

[Fenster]

I agree that might happen & there is always going to be a new young guy for a top fighter. The problem is he still doesn't have ENOUGH quality names on his record, and I think you can only argue that one of those fighters was a top-tier, prime fighter & that's Kessler. Eubank, Hopkins & Jones Jr were all some way past their peak, whilst Lacy & Reid were just frankly not on the same level as Joe. Anyone who's knows a bit about boxing can tell just how good Dawson is. The fact is if he won that fight than I think it would kill off a lot of the doubts that remain about him. It would at least add another top name to gloss over fighting the likes of Tocker Pudwill, Jimenez & Mario Veit (TWICE!)

That's exactly what many people said before he beat Lacy... and then before Kessler... and then before Hopkins... and then even before old Roy

Who said that about and old RJJ ? alot of people were calling that fight a farce including myself. People were "hoping" RJJ would win. But many people knew RJJ was a shot fighter and that it was a pointless fight, considering RJJ hadn't had a good performance at Light Heavyweight since 2002.

Don't even get me started on Jeff Lacy, the same Jeff Lacy who went life and death with Omar Sheika, and a desperate struggle against Syd Vanderpool. All before the Joe Calzaghe fight, the only reason Jeff Lacy got hype was because he beat an old shot Robin Reid.

Who gave Joe Calzaghe a tough fight, so boxing fans thought if he beat Robin Reid easily he surely will beat Joe Calzaghe, i certainly did not though. Also because he was American and the American's hadn't had a good Super Middleweight in quite sometime, hence where all the hype come from.

I only give Joe Calzaghe credit for his wins against Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, in recent years. Because Mikkel Kessler was a good fighter, and it was a fight between the 2 best Super Middleweights in the world. And Mikkel Kessler had some good world championship experience aswell as good technical skills.

But you could even argue Mikkel Kessler was overhyped, because his best win was arguably against Anthony Mundine. Who was one of Sven Ottke's 1 punch KO victims who basically couldn't KO Mini-Me on Big Brother. I don't think that way but you could easily make that argument.

And Bernard Hopkins is a very good fighter at 43, so Joe Calzaghe does deserve credit. But you cannot be in your prime at 43, and i don't think Joe Calzaghe won the fight anyway. And had it been against the Bernard Hopkins of the late 90s, i think Bernard Hopkins would of won.

few last comments Joe Calzaghe is a very good fighter, one of the best British fighters for years. But i just don't get that special feeling when i watch Joe Calzaghe, like i do when i watch Pernell Whitaker, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, Ricardo Lopez, ETC.

Do you copy and paste this stuff or constantly repeat type it?

Why are you telling me about Mundine getting sparked by the ultimate powderpuff Ottke? It's one of my all time favourite KO's. Do you think i didn't know about it? Over the years ive posted the picture a million times.

[ICB]

That's exactly what many people said before he beat Lacy... and then before Kessler... and then before Hopkins... and then even before old Roy

Who said that about and old RJJ ? alot of people were calling that fight a farce including myself. People were "hoping" RJJ would win. But many people knew RJJ was a shot fighter and that it was a pointless fight, considering RJJ hadn't had a good performance at Light Heavyweight since 2002.

Don't even get me started on Jeff Lacy, the same Jeff Lacy who went life and death with Omar Sheika, and a desperate struggle against Syd Vanderpool. All before the Joe Calzaghe fight, the only reason Jeff Lacy got hype was because he beat an old shot Robin Reid.

Who gave Joe Calzaghe a tough fight, so boxing fans thought if he beat Robin Reid easily he surely will beat Joe Calzaghe, i certainly did not though. Also because he was American and the American's hadn't had a good Super Middleweight in quite sometime, hence where all the hype come from.

I only give Joe Calzaghe credit for his wins against Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, in recent years. Because Mikkel Kessler was a good fighter, and it was a fight between the 2 best Super Middleweights in the world. And Mikkel Kessler had some good world championship experience aswell as good technical skills.

But you could even argue Mikkel Kessler was overhyped, because his best win was arguably against Anthony Mundine. Who was one of Sven Ottke's 1 punch KO victims who basically couldn't KO Mini-Me on Big Brother. I don't think that way but you could easily make that argument.

And Bernard Hopkins is a very good fighter at 43, so Joe Calzaghe does deserve credit. But you cannot be in your prime at 43, and i don't think Joe Calzaghe won the fight anyway. And had it been against the Bernard Hopkins of the late 90s, i think Bernard Hopkins would of won.

few last comments Joe Calzaghe is a very good fighter, one of the best British fighters for years. But i just don't get that special feeling when i watch Joe Calzaghe, like i do when i watch Pernell Whitaker, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, Ricardo Lopez, ETC.

Do you copy and paste this stuff or constantly repeat type it?

Why are you telling me about Mundine getting sparked by the ultimate powderpuff Ottke? It's one of my all time favourite KO's. Do you think i didn't know about it? Over the years ive posted the picture a million times.

Fenster i could say the same about you, most of your comments about Joe Calzaghe are mostly the same comments you always make. I was just debating back because we always mostly debate on Joe Calzaghe. And secondly no i wasn't telling you about Anthony Mundine getting KO'ed by Sven Ottke, like you didn't know about it.

I was just bringing up a point but i don't really get your point, because most people who debate with you on a Joe Calzaghe thread inform you about stuff you've debated about 1000000s of times.

And known about for years, and on mostly every thread people debate on here. They debate about or are informed about stuff they've known about for years, so like i said i don't really get your point.

[Fenster]

Who said that about and old RJJ ? alot of people were calling that fight a farce including myself. People were "hoping" RJJ would win. But many people knew RJJ was a shot fighter and that it was a pointless fight, considering RJJ hadn't had a good performance at Light Heavyweight since 2002.

Don't even get me started on Jeff Lacy, the same Jeff Lacy who went life and death with Omar Sheika, and a desperate struggle against Syd Vanderpool. All before the Joe Calzaghe fight, the only reason Jeff Lacy got hype was because he beat an old shot Robin Reid.

Who gave Joe Calzaghe a tough fight, so boxing fans thought if he beat Robin Reid easily he surely will beat Joe Calzaghe, i certainly did not though. Also because he was American and the American's hadn't had a good Super Middleweight in quite sometime, hence where all the hype come from.

I only give Joe Calzaghe credit for his wins against Mikkel Kessler, Bernard Hopkins, in recent years. Because Mikkel Kessler was a good fighter, and it was a fight between the 2 best Super Middleweights in the world. And Mikkel Kessler had some good world championship experience aswell as good technical skills.

But you could even argue Mikkel Kessler was overhyped, because his best win was arguably against Anthony Mundine. Who was one of Sven Ottke's 1 punch KO victims who basically couldn't KO Mini-Me on Big Brother. I don't think that way but you could easily make that argument.

And Bernard Hopkins is a very good fighter at 43, so Joe Calzaghe does deserve credit. But you cannot be in your prime at 43, and i don't think Joe Calzaghe won the fight anyway. And had it been against the Bernard Hopkins of the late 90s, i think Bernard Hopkins would of won.

few last comments Joe Calzaghe is a very good fighter, one of the best British fighters for years. But i just don't get that special feeling when i watch Joe Calzaghe, like i do when i watch Pernell Whitaker, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, Ricardo Lopez, ETC.

Do you copy and paste this stuff or constantly repeat type it?

Why are you telling me about Mundine getting sparked by the ultimate powderpuff Ottke? It's one of my all time favourite KO's. Do you think i didn't know about it? Over the years ive posted the picture a million times.

Fenster i could say the same about you, most of your comments about Joe Calzaghe are mostly the same comments you always make. I was just debating back because we always mostly debate on Joe Calzaghe. And secondly no i wasn't telling you about Anthony Mundine getting KO'ed by Sven Ottke, like you didn't know about it.

I was just bringing up a point but i don't really get your point, because most people who debate with you on a Joe Calzaghe thread inform you about stuff you've debated about 1000000s of times.

And known about for years, and on mostly every thread people debate on here. They debate about or are informed about stuff they've known about for years, so like i said i don't really get your point.

Oh right. You worded it like you was telling me something i didn't know. Thats all.

I wouldn't back Ottke to KO mini-me either.

[Spicoli]

Even as a Hopkins fan I think its hypocritle to say he doesnt want to fight young talent, when he just did. He clearly just doesnt want Dawson, and I dont blame him. I hope he does retire but I know he wont. If he continues Id like to see him take on Valuev. It may sound completely crazy but he would likely beat him.

What he actually said on ESPN was that he didn't want to get in the way of the careers of any younger guys after the Pavlik win, although I think he does want to avoid Dawson, and like you I don't blame him. Would like to see him go out on top & I don't think he can top that moment staring out into press row at the end of the Pavlik fight

I don't think he's necessarily intimidated by Dawson, though I'm certain he's well aware of the risk that would come with fighting him. I'm sure Hopkins thinks he would win (I'm sure he think he could topple both Klitschko's in one night), but I doubt Dawson brings a lot of money to the table, and I'd think that that, combined with the risk associate with a Dawson fight, probably makes it seem like it just isn't worth it. I'm sure if the money was there, like it was with Pavlik, he'd be clamoring for the fight.

Sums it up as far as Dawson when you yhink about it.Handlers and promotion may be selling Dawson short and if that rematch with Tarver comes off,he's taking a big step backwards Imo.Dawson is a very solid comer with a future but he does not send shivers into Hopkins or for that matter Calzaghe but at this point with one foot out of the ring towards Retirement..."If it don't make dollars,It don't make cents".More and more,I see Those two heading to a rematch

[napoleon336]

Hopkins won't get Calzaghe and he won't retire.

[ross]

[quote=Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins;666180][quote=CFH;665809if that rematch with Tarver comes off,he's taking a big step backwards Imo.[/quote]

Does Tarver have it in him to beat Dawson, could it have been an off night for Tarver?

Could Dawson come in not as hyped because its just going over old ground and Tarver come in mean and hungry with a point to prove and actually fight?

Wouldnt it just be a big smelly mess if Dawson went and lost

Joe Calzaghe would then have beaten the man that beat the man that beat the man, if you know what im getting at

If Dawson gets beat and Froch fights Kessler and manages to beat him I can see promoters trying to lure Joe out for that one, it wouldnt happen if Kessler wan, Joe sees Froch as an easier fight than Mikkel, he wouldnt want to have to think that hard again at his age, he just wants to punch away and with Froch and his open guard and slow pace, hes made for Joe but its not going to happen because I cant see Froch going anywhere near Kessler let alone beating him.

[Gandalf]

I wouldnt mind seeing a rematch. The first fight was boring as hell, but I think Calzaghe himself fought below par. He would work out a wider decision in a rematch and not make the mistake of getting floored in the first again. There is nothing Hopkins can bring to make me think otherwise. He's certainly not going to outwork Calzaghe nor actually stop him. Might land a few clean shots, but I see Calzaghe being a little less sloppy if they did it again. Would only be worse for Hops.

[Wayne]

According to this article, Hopkins has said the only fight he wants this year is against Calzaghe.

Do you guys think there is a chance of this coming off?

Would you be interested in seeing it?

Boxing: Hopkins: My only option is Calzaghe | Setanta

Just last night on FNF he didn't say that at all. He said he doesn't want to fight young guys like Dawson so he doesn't get in the way of the flow of the upcoming talent. He did say he'd prefer a rematch with Calzaghe, but he did mention other options as well such as Taylor.

I gotta call BS on Hopkins. He doesn't want to get in the way of the flow of the upcoming talent? So that's why he just fought Pavlik and why he'd be open to a rematch with Taylor? He doesn't want to fight Dawson because he'll get beat. Dawson is too fast and probably strong enough to put a hurt on him.

[Wayne]

Just last night on FNF he didn't say that at all. He said he doesn't want to fight young guys like Dawson so he doesn't get in the way of the flow of the upcoming talent. He did say he'd prefer a rematch with Calzaghe, but he did mention other options as well such as Taylor.

Yeah, that's what I thought as well, but this appears to have different quotes from him than what I remember him saying, so I thought that maybe he had clarified this later on

IMHO Calzaghe doesnt want to rematch Hopkins because he knows he was very lucky to get a SD win in their first fight. He's scared his 0 will go along with his legacy. BUT. What Calzaghe doesnt realise is his legacy is stained until he does LEGITIMATELY beat Bernard Hopkins

No it's not. Everyone with a legacy has a shady looking win somewhere that they never cleared up or a fight they should have taken that didn't happen. To say not taking one fight scratches Joe's ENTIRE legacy just isn't a fair thing to assume.

[Gandalf]

Yeah, that's what I thought as well, but this appears to have different quotes from him than what I remember him saying, so I thought that maybe he had clarified this later on

IMHO Calzaghe doesnt want to rematch Hopkins because he knows he was very lucky to get a SD win in their first fight. He's scared his 0 will go along with his legacy. BUT. What Calzaghe doesnt realise is his legacy is stained until he does LEGITIMATELY beat Bernard Hopkins

No it's not. Everyone with a legacy has a shady looking win somewhere that they never cleared up or a fight they should have taken that didn't happen. To say not taking one fight scratches Joe's ENTIRE legacy just isn't a fair thing to assume.

Agreed. Calzaghe has beaten Hopkins and that is a fact. And I dont think most people think Hopkins won their bout anyway. I would like a rematch just to laugh at the idiotic posters who post that the tripe that they do. But Calzaghe doesnt need to do it by any stretch of the imagination.

Calzaghe would take most of the rounds in a rematch, for sure.

[JonnyFolds]

Just last night on FNF he didn't say that at all. He said he doesn't want to fight young guys like Dawson so he doesn't get in the way of the flow of the upcoming talent. He did say he'd prefer a rematch with Calzaghe, but he did mention other options as well such as Taylor.

Yeah, that's what I thought as well, but this appears to have different quotes from him than what I remember him saying, so I thought that maybe he had clarified this later on

IMHO Calzaghe doesnt want to rematch Hopkins because he knows he was very lucky to get a SD win in their first fight. He's scared his 0 will go along with his legacy. BUT. What Calzaghe doesnt realise is his legacy is stained until he does LEGITIMATELY beat Bernard Hopkins

Actually Hopkins legacy is stained from not being able to beat Calzaghe. I hardly see it the other way. Still surprised people think Hopkins got robbed.

And what Hopkins means about not fighting Dawson and younger guys is that the doesn't want to get KOed. I don't think it has much to do with the "flow of new talent" or however he put it. It's either that or smaller fighter.
I.E. He wants low health risk, and high pay. Can't really blame him.