Bernard Hopkins

[Taeth]

Ok you keep believing that mate when Hopkins fought Calzaghe he didn't fight nowhere near as offensive as he did vs Pavlik and to say he didn't do it vs Calzaghe because he couldn't is just laughable Calzaghe only just beat Hopkins many including myself thought Hopkins did enough to keep his title.

Kelly Pavlik walked forward in straight lines, not throwing punches. With slow footwork no head movement and kept telegraphing his punches. Joe Calzaghe threw many more punches with much more variety and kept the pressure on, he also used angles so he wasn't an easy target to hit while pressuring.

I thought Bernard Hopkins also won the Joe Calzaghe fight by 1 point, i had it 6-6 but with the knockdown in the first round giving Bernard Hopkins the edge. But Bernard Hopkins didn't fight as good against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe kept the pressure on and didn't allow Bernard Hopkins, have time to rest like Kelly Pavlik did.

Exactly.

Even people that think Hopkins beat Calzaghe all have it a close fight.

Hopkins simply exposed Pavlik for the limited fighter he is. He never looked to have a single thing over Calzaghe apart from punch power.

Are you talking about Hopkins or Pavlik because Hopkins has way better technique, skill, defense, chin, etc, etc, etc then Calzaghe. He is the superior fighter. He has foughten better competition and he beat Calzaghe, close or not he's 43 and Calzaghe barely was able to hang with him becuase of his age. Put the 36 year old bernard who fought Trinidad in there and Calzaghe would have been schooled. It was easy to see that besides he lack of output that Bernard was another level of fighter compared to joe.

[BIG H]

Despite lack of output Aint that quite important in boxing? It aint Dancing with the stars

[Gandalf]

Kelly Pavlik walked forward in straight lines, not throwing punches. With slow footwork no head movement and kept telegraphing his punches. Joe Calzaghe threw many more punches with much more variety and kept the pressure on, he also used angles so he wasn't an easy target to hit while pressuring.

I thought Bernard Hopkins also won the Joe Calzaghe fight by 1 point, i had it 6-6 but with the knockdown in the first round giving Bernard Hopkins the edge. But Bernard Hopkins didn't fight as good against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe kept the pressure on and didn't allow Bernard Hopkins, have time to rest like Kelly Pavlik did.

Exactly.

Even people that think Hopkins beat Calzaghe all have it a close fight.

Hopkins simply exposed Pavlik for the limited fighter he is. He never looked to have a single thing over Calzaghe apart from punch power.

Are you talking about Hopkins or Pavlik because Hopkins has way better technique, skill, defense, chin, etc, etc, etc then Calzaghe. He is the superior fighter. He has foughten better competition and he beat Calzaghe, close or not he's 43 and Calzaghe barely was able to hang with him becuase of his age. Put the 36 year old bernard who fought Trinidad in there and Calzaghe would have been schooled. It was easy to see that besides he lack of output that Bernard was another level of fighter compared to joe.

Calzaghe would have been schooled by Hopkins?

Nonsense. Hopkins would never have been able to school Calzaghe. Hopkins was taken to the wire twice by Taylor who we all know for what he is. Pretty limited. Hopkins has his limitations too and is not this almighty being that you talk of. He is a great fighter and all great fighters come up against challenges that are sometimes too much. Hopkins: Jones anybody? To a lesser extent Calzaghe: Hopkins?

The Hopkins of last night and the Hopkins that faced Trinidad would both have had fits against Joe. Calzaghe against Hopkins several years ago is also a fight where Calzaghe has been the bigger fighter for longer.

Calzaghe is a great fighter himself....all this he would be schooled by blah blah because of superior chin, defense....whatever....load of hoolahlah to be honest..

Nobody schools Joe Calzaghe ever. Let Hopkins have another go, and it will be much worse for him. Calzaghe would warm up properly and go from the start instead of the 5th...

[Fenster]

Kelly Pavlik walked forward in straight lines, not throwing punches. With slow footwork no head movement and kept telegraphing his punches. Joe Calzaghe threw many more punches with much more variety and kept the pressure on, he also used angles so he wasn't an easy target to hit while pressuring.

I thought Bernard Hopkins also won the Joe Calzaghe fight by 1 point, i had it 6-6 but with the knockdown in the first round giving Bernard Hopkins the edge. But Bernard Hopkins didn't fight as good against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe kept the pressure on and didn't allow Bernard Hopkins, have time to rest like Kelly Pavlik did.

Exactly.

Even people that think Hopkins beat Calzaghe all have it a close fight.

Hopkins simply exposed Pavlik for the limited fighter he is. He never looked to have a single thing over Calzaghe apart from punch power.

Are you talking about Hopkins or Pavlik because Hopkins has way better technique, skill, defense, chin, etc, etc, etc then Calzaghe. He is the superior fighter. He has foughten better competition and he beat Calzaghe, close or not he's 43 and Calzaghe barely was able to hang with him becuase of his age. Put the 36 year old bernard who fought Trinidad in there and Calzaghe would have been schooled. It was easy to see that besides he lack of output that Bernard was another level of fighter compared to joe.

I meant Pavlik.

But you're talking out of your arse.

If Hopkins was/is so superior to Calzaghe he would have beaten him like he did Pavlik, you plum.

They had a close-ish fight (Calzaghe won comfortably in my eyes on repeated viewing) because they are equally matched "great" fighters. Yes Hopkins may have done things different if younger but that goes for Calzaghe too.

[Kev]

Kelly Pavlik walked forward in straight lines, not throwing punches. With slow footwork no head movement and kept telegraphing his punches. Joe Calzaghe threw many more punches with much more variety and kept the pressure on, he also used angles so he wasn't an easy target to hit while pressuring.

I thought Bernard Hopkins also won the Joe Calzaghe fight by 1 point, i had it 6-6 but with the knockdown in the first round giving Bernard Hopkins the edge. But Bernard Hopkins didn't fight as good against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe kept the pressure on and didn't allow Bernard Hopkins, have time to rest like Kelly Pavlik did.

Exactly.

Even people that think Hopkins beat Calzaghe all have it a close fight.

Hopkins simply exposed Pavlik for the limited fighter he is. He never looked to have a single thing over Calzaghe apart from punch power.

Are you talking about Hopkins or Pavlik because Hopkins has way better technique, skill, defense, chin, etc, etc, etc then Calzaghe. He is the superior fighter. He has foughten better competition and he beat Calzaghe, close or not he's 43 and Calzaghe barely was able to hang with him becuase of his age. Put the 36 year old bernard who fought Trinidad in there and Calzaghe would have been schooled. It was easy to see that besides he lack of output that Bernard was another level of fighter compared to joe.

I asked this same question to somebody else today but I'll repeat it here.

If B Hop has fought better competition than Joe name me ONE fighter who B Hop has beat that you think Joe wouldn't have been able to beat?

Kessler and Eubank are tougher opponents than De La Hoya, Trinidad, Pavlik and Tarver imo. They may not have the HOF credentials of an Oscar or a Tito but they were tougher fights.