Hopkins - Calzaghe: Who really won?

[1g5a22]

i guess you didn't watch rounds 1,2,3,6,7,10, that Hopkins should of won.

your wrong mate,,simple as!

look it was on your soil with your judges and your referree,listen to foreman and ledderman etc commentating,

if it was so close why were the 2 judges scoring heavily in favour of joe,i really wouldnt give a shit if hopkins won,but iv watched twice and i was right the first time,

joe got into his rhythm(as much as u can do against hopkins) and settled down as the fight went on,yes it was messy and awkward,but it wasnt difficult to score,the delahoya/mayweather was a more controverial fight ,we should still be debating about that rather than this one,if any.

and you gotta give joe his props,,the guy fights in a new weight with no warmups,on foreign soil against a p4p great and does the job.

all i see everywere now are "hopkins was old" "joes overrated" etc etc
u know predictable shit that is totally unoriginal,one bad performance against a fighter who has a knack of making boxers look bad doesnt make you overrated,the kessler fight was a masterclass

joe crossed the pond with his little dad and a rucksack and took on the hopkins hype machine and entourage in full swing with all the "i hired the boxing a team" to beat this chump,and made him look a prat in the process,fact is he did get beat by a white boy,and by the better man.

just to let you know i ain't american, they ain't my judges and referee, i was born and raised in london and now live in scotland. me = British.

deciding that calzaghe won because of two of the judges scorecards isn't really a good way to decide if the fight wasn't close.

did casamayor beat santa cruz did dawson really beat johnson 116-112?? i didn't see it but the judges gave it to them. so the judges scorecards don't sometimes show you on how a fight is actually going.

i apologise for being presumptuous about your nationality,and yes i thought johnson won that fight too,but i know joe won this one!!

we will agree to disagree,