Hopkins - Calzaghe: Who really won?

[HattonTheHammer]

i really dont get all the contoversy,,,,,,,,,

iv been following the fight game for years and i like to think i have clear judgement,and for me calzaghe won that fight easily,,

it was not an SD at all,it was a clear UD to calzaghe,iv watched it twice and i was right the first time,joe outpointed him,yes it wasnt a great performance by usual his standards but he got the job done

ledderman,foreman,the two judges etc had it like i did,a UD!

next,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Apart from the odd obliviant hopkin fan or calzaghe hater i think the large majority also accept there was nothing controversial about calzaghe winning the fight when most of us scored it in his favour.

Of course b-hops shots had more of an effect than JC`s, its much easier to hit someone whos coming forward and throwing their own weight about rather than a guy who specialises in cagey defense and just waits for his opponent to over commit before striking with any real intent.

But the facts dont lie, JC threw a hell of a lot more punches, landed loads more than hopkins and was the agressor from round 4 onwards.

As said already to score that fight to hopkins you have to be either incredibly naive or a female judge employed by the nevada state commission!!

Well, I do agree that Calzaghe won and he did throw a hell of a lot more punches and he did seem to just take total control in the last 3rd of the fight, you guys are making it sound like a white wash which it was not... Hop just didn't do enough to win in the later parts of the fight... He did well in the first third, the middle rounds were extremely hard to score and Joe took control of the later rounds...

I don't see how anyone can not score it for Joe... A draw although extemely controvercial I saw as a possibility but I never though it would b scored for Hopkins...

It was not a win by a large margin, though... Don't get it twisted

agreed, but is it actually possible to completely outscore someone with hopkins technique

The guys a top draw fighter nobody can dispute that, but cant help but wonder what could of actually happened had hopkins been more carefree and backed up what he said he was going to do all along!!

In terms of a boxing contest it was a dull fight that 1st round apart offered very little in the way of excitement, i put that down entirely to hopkins!!

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

Apart from the odd obliviant hopkin fan or calzaghe hater i think the large majority also accept there was nothing controversial about calzaghe winning the fight when most of us scored it in his favour.

Of course b-hops shots had more of an effect than JC`s, its much easier to hit someone whos coming forward and throwing their own weight about rather than a guy who specialises in cagey defense and just waits for his opponent to over commit before striking with any real intent.

But the facts dont lie, JC threw a hell of a lot more punches, landed loads more than hopkins and was the agressor from round 4 onwards.

As said already to score that fight to hopkins you have to be either incredibly naive or a female judge employed by the nevada state commission!!

Well, I do agree that Calzaghe won and he did throw a hell of a lot more punches and he did seem to just take total control in the last 3rd of the fight, you guys are making it sound like a white wash which it was not... Hop just didn't do enough to win in the later parts of the fight... He did well in the first third, the middle rounds were extremely hard to score and Joe took control of the later rounds...

I don't see how anyone can not score it for Joe... A draw although extemely controvercial I saw as a possibility but I never though it would b scored for Hopkins...

It was not a win by a large margin, though... Don't get it twisted

agreed, but is it actually possible to completely outscore someone with hopkins technique

The guys a top draw fighter nobody can dispute that, but cant help but wonder what could of actually happened had hopkins been more carefree and backed up what he said he was going to do all along!!

In terms of a boxing contest it was a dull fight that 1st round apart offered very little in the way of excitement, i put that down entirely to hopkins!!

Yes... But not someone like Joe. I said all along that Calzaghe was just gonna be to busy for him as most people did. Joe, although not putting much mustard on his punches, throws swarming flurrys that you cant roll away from... They're coming from every angle...

So in answering your question, deffinitly. Taylor would have never been the Champion if I were a judge that night of the first fight. I had it a draw. So there it is.

(of course I thought Taylor won the second fight)

Hopkins is just not able to stay busy enough to stay in the fight and it didn't help that he was coasting due to his corner saying, "You're winning the fight" like half way through the fight...

His style is boring but he doesn't care. He's in it to win it. He needs to retire, though.. He doesn't have much else to offer the sport.

[donnydarkoIRL]

I feel that the judges scores reflected not only Calzaghe's workrate, but also their disdain for Hopkin's questionable tactics.

A justifiable and correct win for Joe Calzaghe.

[The Fightfan]

I just couldn't see Hopkins taking anymore than 4 rounds.He did knock Joe down in the first so that would make it closer points wise but in rounds
8-4 for Joe. 1 punch 1 point in my book.