OK just watched the fight

[Andre]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

[Kev]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

[Puya]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

Well said baggins

for me JC vs B-Hop was a clear UD. a lot wider than the judges saw it.

[ICB]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

Most of Joe Calzaghe's punches were ineffective, i actually watched his flurries in slow motion and most of them were hitting the gloves. Or wern't landeing clean, can you actually point out to me how many real flush shots Joe Calzaghe landed in the entire fight ? I for certain liked Bernard Hopkins cleaner more effective punches, and they were easy to see aswell.

I think Bernard Hopkins won by one point i had it 6-6, with the knockdown being the difference. But i don't care what anyone says and i'll keep saying it no matter what, i thought Robin Reid beat Joe Calzaghe quite convincingly by atleast a couple of points.

[CFH]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

Most of Joe Calzaghe's punches were ineffective, i actually watched his flurries in slow motion and most of them were hitting the gloves. Or wern't landeing clean, can you actually point out to me how many real flush shots Joe Calzaghe landed in the entire fight ? I for certain liked Bernard Hopkins cleaner more effective punches, and they were easy to see aswell.

I think Bernard Hopkins won by one point i had it 6-6, with the knockdown being the difference. But i don't care what anyone says and i'll keep saying it no matter what, i thought Robin Reid beat Joe Calzaghe quite convincingly by atleast a couple of points.

For what's it's worth, I scored it the same. For the record, I was cheering for Calzaghe - I remember thinking he edged it when I saw the fight live on tv, but I rewatched it a few weeks ago and scored it and I had Hopkins winning.

[Spicoli]

Have to say it's not been a harsh reaction by both fan followings,nice post fight compared to some others.I had no problems with the fight early on but as it went on...it was clear how the street was paved.Alot is made of the taunting by Calzaghe but I can not fault him.Yes it was prickish,and frankly pretty dumb at times....I thought for sure he would pull a Campbell as it increased,but he turned the tables

As it stands,Calzaghe vs. Hopkins is a big reality.Personally,I do not want that fight in too much based on styles.I did have Joe winning the first go by about 2 points and should Hopkins take the handcuffs off and step in with combos,he could pull it off in rematch.What other options/Big bank days do each have ?

[Andre]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

Maybe I should actually watch the fight myself , I was posting on hearsay in this case.

So it wasn't close as some say?

What was the reason some say Hopkins some say Joe then?

Was it the old scoring glances against scoring more power shots?
Thats a common one that splits the group,people scoring amature like shots that touch but have no effect or ones that are checked before landing or taken with a twist and a glove are still scored by many.

So did Hopkins get sent backwards at all?
Was it Joe comming forwards all night, or both of them even in attack and it came down to a shot count?

Sounds from your post like Bernard played it with a counter punchers moves but with spoilers arms and no hits.

[CFH]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I didn't think the fight was all that close really.

Hopkins whines like a little bitch when he loses any fight and he because his style is so ugly it prevents anyone from looking good even in victory his fans will claim a poor performance from the opponent as a win.

Apart from the first round knockdown Hopkins didn't do much at all imo.

Yes he negated most of what Calzaghe did too but Calzaghe was the only guy who was trying to win that fight. All Hopkins did was hold and spoil.

Maybe I should actually watch the fight myself , I was posting on hearsay in this case.

So it wasn't close as some say?

What was the reason some say Hopkins some say Joe then?

Was it the old scoring glances against scoring more power shots?
Thats a common one that splits the group,people scoring amature like shots that touch but have no effect or ones that are checked before landing or taken with a twist and a glove are still scored by many.

So did Hopkins get sent backwards at all?
Was it Joe comming forwards all night, or both of them even in attack and it came down to a shot count?

Sounds from your post like Bernard played it with a counter punchers moves but with spoilers arms and no hits.

That's exactly what is was. That, and Hopkins was moving backwards the whole fight. Calzaghe couldn't land sweet fuck all though, Hopkins was landing by far the better punches.

[Kev]

I have a hard job trying to see how Hopkins could have won.

For what it's worth here are the punch stats

CompuBox Final Stats: Bernard Hopkins vs. Joe Calzaghe

It was a close fight though and I can't disagree with those who say that Joe didn't wrest the title away from Hopkins as he was the only fighter who was hurt in the fight.

I've certainly seen worse decisions in boxing than it would have been to award Hopkins the win, but for me he won the fight.

I saw it as about as close as Mayweather Oscar with an additional point to Oscar for a knockdown. That would certainly leave it pretty close, 115/113 or something and if it would have gone to Hopkins Calzaghe would have been stretching it to say he was robbed blind.

At the end of the day though I truly think the right man won the fight.

I mean regardless of whether people preferred the more accurate shots of Hopkins the punchstats are clear that Calzaghe massively outlanded him and out worked him. He also controlled the whole fight, coming forward the whole time trying to make things happen.

Hopkins was awkward especially early but by the late rounds he was just holding and looking to spoil. I think it was the 10th when he claimed a dubious low blow and took the full 5 minutes to recover, then he tried again in the 11th but the ref was wise to it that time.

From about the 8th or 9th round he didn't try and win the fight, he just tried to spoil and prevent Joe from doing anything.

I personally think those kind of boxers deserve to lose close fights because they have a negative attitude but then I guess that's just me.

Look at Ishe Smith against Powell and Julio. Both fights he has a case for maybe doing enough, but he won't let his hands go and is so risk aversive that he gets outworked. Sure he does better work, but he does far less than the other guy overall.

That has been Hopkins problem in all 3 of his defeats in recent years.

[Andre]

I have a hard job trying to see how Hopkins could have won.

For what it's worth here are the punch stats

CompuBox Final Stats: Bernard Hopkins vs. Joe Calzaghe

It was a close fight though and I can't disagree with those who say that Joe didn't wrest the title away from Hopkins as he was the only fighter who was hurt in the fight.

I've certainly seen worse decisions in boxing than it would have been to award Hopkins the win, but for me he won the fight.

I saw it as about as close as Mayweather Oscar with an additional point to Oscar for a knockdown. That would certainly leave it pretty close, 115/113 or something and if it would have gone to Hopkins Calzaghe would have been stretching it to say he was robbed blind.

At the end of the day though I truly think the right man won the fight.

I mean regardless of whether people preferred the more accurate shots of Hopkins the punchstats are clear that Calzaghe massively outlanded him and out worked him. He also controlled the whole fight, coming forward the whole time trying to make things happen.

Hopkins was awkward especially early but by the late rounds he was just holding and looking to spoil. I think it was the 10th when he claimed a dubious low blow and took the full 5 minutes to recover, then he tried again in the 11th but the ref was wise to it that time.

From about the 8th or 9th round he didn't try and win the fight, he just tried to spoil and prevent Joe from doing anything.

I personally think those kind of boxers deserve to lose close fights because they have a negative attitude but then I guess that's just me.

Look at Ishe Smith against Powell and Julio. Both fights he has a case for maybe doing enough, but he won't let his hands go and is so risk aversive that he gets outworked. Sure he does better work, but he does far less than the other guy overall.

That has been Hopkins problem in all 3 of his defeats in recent years.

Well you've sold me,
What you say and the stats seem to point out that Joe did twice the work even if the shots wern't as telling as Bernards.

[ICB]

I have a hard job trying to see how Hopkins could have won.

For what it's worth here are the punch stats

CompuBox Final Stats: Bernard Hopkins vs. Joe Calzaghe

It was a close fight though and I can't disagree with those who say that Joe didn't wrest the title away from Hopkins as he was the only fighter who was hurt in the fight.

I've certainly seen worse decisions in boxing than it would have been to award Hopkins the win, but for me he won the fight.

I saw it as about as close as Mayweather Oscar with an additional point to Oscar for a knockdown. That would certainly leave it pretty close, 115/113 or something and if it would have gone to Hopkins Calzaghe would have been stretching it to say he was robbed blind.

At the end of the day though I truly think the right man won the fight.

I mean regardless of whether people preferred the more accurate shots of Hopkins the punchstats are clear that Calzaghe massively outlanded him and out worked him. He also controlled the whole fight, coming forward the whole time trying to make things happen.

Hopkins was awkward especially early but by the late rounds he was just holding and looking to spoil. I think it was the 10th when he claimed a dubious low blow and took the full 5 minutes to recover, then he tried again in the 11th but the ref was wise to it that time.

From about the 8th or 9th round he didn't try and win the fight, he just tried to spoil and prevent Joe from doing anything.

I personally think those kind of boxers deserve to lose close fights because they have a negative attitude but then I guess that's just me.

Look at Ishe Smith against Powell and Julio. Both fights he has a case for maybe doing enough, but he won't let his hands go and is so risk aversive that he gets outworked. Sure he does better work, but he does far less than the other guy overall.

That has been Hopkins problem in all 3 of his defeats in recent years.

Well you've sold me,
What you say and the stats seem to point out that Joe did twice the work even if the shots wern't as telling as Bernards.

Well according to the punchstats regarding James Toney vs Samuel Peter 1, Samuel Peter landed 100 more punches and threw 100 more punches than James Toney. Yet everyone consider's that a robbery, so i guess the punchstats tell the whole story regarding that fight ?

No they don't and they don't tell the how whole story regarding, Joe Calzaghe vs Bernard Hopkins either. If anyone actually believes Joe Calzaghe landed 187 punches they've got to be having a laugh. Punchstats are misleading and inaccurate, and Joe Calzaghe didn't land as many punches as he was credited with.

[intoccabile]

I honestly don't know how anyone can be impressed with Joe or give him credit for this win. Not saying Joe isn't great - but this isn't the win that would give him that status.

What exactly did Roy do that made you impressed with Joe?

[bambamdaddio]

Brilliant assessment saddo ... I saw it all pretty much as you saw it and there is nothing really I could add..

[Conrad]

I haven't watched the fight again since Saturday but at the time I did feel a little disappointed.

Not disappointed with Calzaghe but with Jones himself. I really believed from the 24/7 shows and the build up that RJJ was more pumped for this fight and in better shape than he had been for years.

Yet it was if he didn't even try against JC, every time Joe dropped his guard and hung his head Roy never tried to land. I've never been a fan of showboating and I felt Joe took it too far even if it was RJJ who he was doing it against.

All that said Calzaghe beat him easily and convincingly and whether you like him or not you can't argue with that.

[Youngblood]

Mate after what Bernard did to Pavlic and considering how close their first fight was there would be a diffferent light on it than just the usual rematch. I wonder who most Americans would chose to put up against him next if they could?

I understand what you are saying Andre, and I think it would be a great fight. But I just don't see any benefit in it for Joe. He only stands to lose, and little to gain in the legacy dept. That's just my opinion. And I don't even like Joe that much, but I do respect him.