Quote Originally Posted by Pugilistic View Post

Thanks for the laugh.

So your telling me that Prime for Prime Calzaghe could of beat Hopkins 12 rounds to 0. I said could not would, he convincingly won the last 8 in the fight they did have, i was offering another alternative to hopkins would have beaten calazaghi if he was younger

I mean there's biased then there's that post above. Your posts are as biast as mine

It doesn't make a difference where the fight was staged whether it be in America or Britain. All that matters is how their styles mesh in the ring. Yes it does, look at the supersix and how the results have gone there, have there been any away victories? home advantage is a big advantage

a 43 year old Hopkins was getting the better of Calzaghe in the first four rounds of their fight then he got tired. Calzaghe was then able to leave his mark on the fight by outworking and out landing Hopkins down the stretch. Hopkins won the first 4, calazaghi won the last 8, calazaghi fights were often close at the start and people couldnt live with him after the first few, its the way he fights

Ever since 2005, Hopkins has relied on slowing down the tempo of a fight to win. This version of Hopkins rarely fights on the inside and rarely throw combinations. A younger Hopkins didn't do that. He fought for 12 rounds at a good pace, he would throw combinations on a regular basis and he would get on the inside and do damage. A younger calazaghi never got put down, he started to get put over a bit more as his carear progressed, it is unlikely hopkins would have scored the Knock down in a fight earlier in their carears, joe would have settled quicker and wouldnt have taken 4 rounds to get going

Calzaghe wouldn't be able to outwork Hopkins like he did in 2008 because this Hopkins put in work every round and based on how well a 43 year old Hopkins did for four rounds a younger version would of done it far longer. he ouworked everyone else he fought after 4 rounds, why would hopkins have been any different

So if Calzaghe couldn't outwork Hopkins as much as he did in 08 because the younger version had much better stamina, how does Calzaghe actually beat him. See point above

Like you said with your narrow minded opinion, Calzaghe beat everyone because of stamina and hand speed. See points above

That actually doesn't give enough credit to how good Joe was. No it doesnt you are right, you brought the stamina issue up, i was just saying this was an massive advantage in all his fights, why would hopkins have been any different.

P.S - Tyson didn't beat the majority of his opponents based only on his power. What about his exceptional hand speed, head movement, fast fluent footwork, his conditioning, his ability to put punches together to the body and head. Just an example, you said calazaghi only beat hopkins coz of stamina, thats a massive asset he had in all his fights, I only pull lots of women coz im good looking

Boxing ain't that simple.

look man, for some reason a lot of people are bitter about calazaghi beating hopkins and we get all these excuses about age

fact is the biggest injustice in the fight was that it ended as a split descision, i dont know what the score was that went hopkins way but someone gave hopkins at least 6 rounds, which 6 did he win?

that fight is the easiest fight i have ever watched to score

hopkins won the first 4 calazaghi the last 8, clear as day