Calzaghe Looked Ordinary? Are You Guys Nuts?

[superheavyrhun]

Just as Sweetpea said, I agreed with most all of it except Joe being p4p no1. A big fight against a competitive Light-Heavy champion who comes to fight would be the perfect showpiece finish for his career in my view. BCD or Tarver....he needs to go out with a vintage performance in my view, so probably not a rematch with BHop.

[Scrap]

As in most things, I like my Sportsmen to be Heroes. Not con artists as is Hopkins, Ive often wondered what was the reason He got put in Jail. Was it Fraud or Mugging a Pensioner.

[Conrad]

I totally agree, Joe did a top job with what he had to work with.

I watched the fight live here in Vegas so not had chnce to watch it again sober, but I felt Joe comfortably won. Hopkins had no plan other than a two hit combo, big right over the top followed by head butt.

Joe had no way of looking good against Hopkins, he did as good as we possibly could have expected.

[Pugilistic]

to be honest he did, hopkins does that to fighters, hopkins also made joe's workrate drop and his punches ineffective while hitting joe with good leads.

[donnydarkoIRL]

I think we're being a bit unfair to Hopkins.
He employed dirty tactics, poor sportsmanship and questionable strategy, but in doing so he made the most out of an aged 43 year old body and gave Joe a terrific struggle and a scrappy fight.

The fight was not a case of "what Calzaghe did wrong." It was a case of what Bernard did right.
And what Hopkins did, was drag Joe out of his comfort zonee, negate his counter punching ability and reflexes and drag him into a messy fight.
In turn, Joe coped reasonably well with a "great effort" from Hopkins and dealt out just enugh to be awarded the fight.

It was a split decision, but the judge that awarded the fight to Hopkins scored it 114-113.
Subtract the knockdown and thats a draw.
Joe did well. Obviously better than Tarver and Winky.
They are not ordinary fighters and neither is Joe.

[bikersk]

I think we're being a bit unfair to Hopkins.
He employed dirty tactics, poor sportsmanship and questionable strategy, but in doing so he made the most out of an aged 43 year old body and gave Joe a terrific struggle and a scrappy fight.

The fight was not a case of "what Calzaghe did wrong." It was a case of what Bernard did right.
And what Hopkins did, was drag Joe out of his comfort zonee, negate his counter punching ability and reflexes and drag him into a messy fight.
In turn, Joe coped reasonably well with a "great effort" from Hopkins and dealt out just enugh to be awarded the fight.

It was a split decision, but the judge that awarded the fight to Hopkins scored it 114-113.
Subtract the knockdown and thats a draw.
Joe did well. Obviously better than Tarver and Winky.
They are not ordinary fighters and neither is Joe.

Well put hitmandonny. It was always going to be a close fight. I thought Hopkins was going to get the win before the fight being in the US and all but Joe did enough to win. No-one dominated and no-one got beat up, but both guys did well. I participated in the rbr and went over what I'd observed and i had Joe just ahead, I thought I was being relatively unbiased.

People must remember that Hopkins makes guys look, well not ordinary, but like donny said takes guys out of their comfort zone and tries to push the fight into his plan. He almost did it but just fell a little short, but both guys did well. I was very happy for the win for Joe as it's nice for the titles to spread around the world and not just be with US fighters. It is a big effort to go to the states and beat a legend, and a big effort to fight and undefeated champ when you are 43 years old at the highest level.

[Bx730NY]

to be honest he did, hopkins does that to fighters, hopkins also made joe's workrate drop and his punches ineffective while hitting joe with good leads.

He did land some right hand leads throughout the fight. I took Joe some time to get the timing down and what made it tougher was the fact that he had to lean left almost into the punch otherwise he would have getting hit with hopkins head which was coming right behind it.

[donnydarkoIRL]

I agree with that. Yeah I don't know what's going on with Cortez. Can't figure him out.

Well I feel Cortez was a disgrace and I'll tell you why.

In the Ricky Hatton Floyd Mayweather bout Cortez was completely intolerant of Hatton keeping Mayweather in place with an arm and hitting. Many fans and trainers deem this "working rough on the inside." Cortez completely prevented Hatton from employing this tactic and ruined Hatton's chances of survinng the 12 rounds.
He then administered a warning and point deduction on an attempted foul.

In the Hopkins fight, Cortez not only allowed Hopkins to utilise a hit and hold style throughout the twelve rounds without warning Hopkins, he also allowed him to get away with numerous uses of the head and punches to the thigh. I don't blame Hopkins for this. Any professional fighter should press any advantage they have.

Cortez clearly altered his attitude and approach to theses two fights according to the personalities involved.
A referee is responsible for a fighters safety, his job is to be completely impartial in performing his duties and the fight with Hopkins proved that he had two completely contrasting standards for Hopkins and Ricky Hatton.
This is not only unprofessional it is also unethical and he should be ashamed of himsel;f for his performance in both fights.

Ok well thought out. Bet you Hopkins did it on the refs blind side though. I recall the commentators mentioning it during the fight that Hopkins was doing some of these on the blind side. He knows how to do that stuff better than anyone else. May not all be the fault of Cortez, but it does look a bit hypocritical.

To be honest mate, there was alot of visible fouls that Hopkins used to test the water.
Cortez allowed them and Hopkins jumped on the opportunity.

My jaw was open during the fight. I wasn't sure If I was seeing properly, then my father said "is this the same referee that reffed the Hatton fight or is it a guy that looks like him" he was also a little shocked!

[BIG H]

As in most things, I like my Sportsmen to be Heroes. Not con artists as is Hopkins, Ive often wondered what was the reason He got put in Jail. Was it Fraud or Mugging a Pensioner.

How did you score it Scrap? Be interested to have your card

[donnydarkoIRL]

I think we're being a bit unfair to Hopkins.
He employed dirty tactics, poor sportsmanship and questionable strategy, but in doing so he made the most out of an aged 43 year old body and gave Joe a terrific struggle and a scrappy fight.

The fight was not a case of "what Calzaghe did wrong." It was a case of what Bernard did right.
And what Hopkins did, was drag Joe out of his comfort zonee, negate his counter punching ability and reflexes and drag him into a messy fight.
In turn, Joe coped reasonably well with a "great effort" from Hopkins and dealt out just enugh to be awarded the fight.

It was a split decision, but the judge that awarded the fight to Hopkins scored it 114-113.
Subtract the knockdown and thats a draw.
Joe did well. Obviously better than Tarver and Winky.
They are not ordinary fighters and neither is Joe.

Well put hitmandonny. It was always going to be a close fight. I thought Hopkins was going to get the win before the fight being in the US and all but Joe did enough to win. No-one dominated and no-one got beat up, but both guys did well. I participated in the rbr and went over what I'd observed and i had Joe just ahead, I thought I was being relatively unbiased.

People must remember that Hopkins makes guys look, well not ordinary, but like donny said takes guys out of their comfort zone and tries to push the fight into his plan. He almost did it but just fell a little short, but both guys did well. I was very happy for the win for Joe as it's nice for the titles to spread around the world and not just be with US fighters. It is a big effort to go to the states and beat a legend, and a big effort to fight and undefeated champ when you are 43 years old at the highest level.

I feel the judges may not have liked the aftertaste of Hopkins' dirty tactics. Because of this they favoured the more active productive boxer.

In that sense it was a triumph for boxing.

As for the referee.

[bikersk]

I think we're being a bit unfair to Hopkins.
He employed dirty tactics, poor sportsmanship and questionable strategy, but in doing so he made the most out of an aged 43 year old body and gave Joe a terrific struggle and a scrappy fight.

The fight was not a case of "what Calzaghe did wrong." It was a case of what Bernard did right.
And what Hopkins did, was drag Joe out of his comfort zonee, negate his counter punching ability and reflexes and drag him into a messy fight.
In turn, Joe coped reasonably well with a "great effort" from Hopkins and dealt out just enugh to be awarded the fight.

It was a split decision, but the judge that awarded the fight to Hopkins scored it 114-113.
Subtract the knockdown and thats a draw.
Joe did well. Obviously better than Tarver and Winky.
They are not ordinary fighters and neither is Joe.

Well put hitmandonny. It was always going to be a close fight. I thought Hopkins was going to get the win before the fight being in the US and all but Joe did enough to win. No-one dominated and no-one got beat up, but both guys did well. I participated in the rbr and went over what I'd observed and i had Joe just ahead, I thought I was being relatively unbiased.

People must remember that Hopkins makes guys look, well not ordinary, but like donny said takes guys out of their comfort zone and tries to push the fight into his plan. He almost did it but just fell a little short, but both guys did well. I was very happy for the win for Joe as it's nice for the titles to spread around the world and not just be with US fighters. It is a big effort to go to the states and beat a legend, and a big effort to fight and undefeated champ when you are 43 years old at the highest level.

I feel the judges may not have liked the aftertaste of Hopkins' dirty tactics. Because of this they favoured the more active productive boxer.

In that sense it was a triumph for boxing.

As for the referee.

I agree with that. Yeah I don't know what's going on with Cortez. Can't figure him out.

[donnydarkoIRL]

Well put hitmandonny. It was always going to be a close fight. I thought Hopkins was going to get the win before the fight being in the US and all but Joe did enough to win. No-one dominated and no-one got beat up, but both guys did well. I participated in the rbr and went over what I'd observed and i had Joe just ahead, I thought I was being relatively unbiased.

People must remember that Hopkins makes guys look, well not ordinary, but like donny said takes guys out of their comfort zone and tries to push the fight into his plan. He almost did it but just fell a little short, but both guys did well. I was very happy for the win for Joe as it's nice for the titles to spread around the world and not just be with US fighters. It is a big effort to go to the states and beat a legend, and a big effort to fight and undefeated champ when you are 43 years old at the highest level.

I feel the judges may not have liked the aftertaste of Hopkins' dirty tactics. Because of this they favoured the more active productive boxer.

In that sense it was a triumph for boxing.

As for the referee.

I agree with that. Yeah I don't know what's going on with Cortez. Can't figure him out.

Well I feel Cortez was a disgrace and I'll tell you why.

In the Ricky Hatton Floyd Mayweather bout Cortez was completely intolerant of Hatton keeping Mayweather in place with an arm and hitting. Many fans and trainers deem this "working rough on the inside." Cortez completely prevented Hatton from employing this tactic and ruined Hatton's chances of survinng the 12 rounds.
He then administered a warning and point deduction on an attempted foul.

In the Hopkins fight, Cortez not only allowed Hopkins to utilise a hit and hold style throughout the twelve rounds without warning Hopkins, he also allowed him to get away with numerous uses of the head and punches to the thigh. I don't blame Hopkins for this. Any professional fighter should press any advantage they have.

Cortez clearly altered his attitude and approach to theses two fights according to the personalities involved.
A referee is responsible for a fighters safety, his job is to be completely impartial in performing his duties and the fight with Hopkins proved that he had two completely contrasting standards for Hopkins and Ricky Hatton.
This is not only unprofessional it is also unethical and he should be ashamed of himsel;f for his performance in both fights.

[bikersk]

I feel the judges may not have liked the aftertaste of Hopkins' dirty tactics. Because of this they favoured the more active productive boxer.

In that sense it was a triumph for boxing.

As for the referee.

I agree with that. Yeah I don't know what's going on with Cortez. Can't figure him out.

Well I feel Cortez was a disgrace and I'll tell you why.

In the Ricky Hatton Floyd Mayweather bout Cortez was completely intolerant of Hatton keeping Mayweather in place with an arm and hitting. Many fans and trainers deem this "working rough on the inside." Cortez completely prevented Hatton from employing this tactic and ruined Hatton's chances of survinng the 12 rounds.
He then administered a warning and point deduction on an attempted foul.

In the Hopkins fight, Cortez not only allowed Hopkins to utilise a hit and hold style throughout the twelve rounds without warning Hopkins, he also allowed him to get away with numerous uses of the head and punches to the thigh. I don't blame Hopkins for this. Any professional fighter should press any advantage they have.

Cortez clearly altered his attitude and approach to theses two fights according to the personalities involved.
A referee is responsible for a fighters safety, his job is to be completely impartial in performing his duties and the fight with Hopkins proved that he had two completely contrasting standards for Hopkins and Ricky Hatton.
This is not only unprofessional it is also unethical and he should be ashamed of himsel;f for his performance in both fights.

Ok well thought out. Bet you Hopkins did it on the refs blind side though. I recall the commentators mentioning it during the fight that Hopkins was doing some of these on the blind side. He knows how to do that stuff better than anyone else. May not all be the fault of Cortez, but it does look a bit hypocritical.

[THE THIRD MAN]

I selected Joe to win by UD against Hopkins but i was far from impressed, Hopkins is a difficult opponent and i really don't like watching him much. Jones Jr will be a different story and Joe will have to improve on that performance to beat RJJ. I give Jones a good chance of upsetting Calzaghe.

[boozeboxer]

Cortez has some kind of ego problem. They introduce him with some gay "firm but fair slogan". And he just always is trying to get into the spotlight and steal the spotlight from the fighters.