Quote Originally Posted by CFH View Post
I find it frusterating when people say things like, "Only a [Calzaghe] hater would score the fight for Hopkins.", or that anyone who scored the fight for Hopkins is "in denial", or Hopkins cheated, or when people bring in all manner of arguments that have nothing do with who actually won the individual rounds etc. People who think Hopkins won have a legitimate point.

No one is saying it was a landslide victory for Hopkins, just that it was a close fight that could've gone either way depending on what you prefer - harder, accurate punches, and defense or aggression and volume.

This Calzaghe-fan inferiority complex some of you have is silly, every fighter has their detractors, and the truly great fighters often have more because at times they can polarize sentiment (ie PBF), but so what? No need to get all pissed off because someone else has a dissenting view about your favorite fighter. It's annoying and it makes it difficult to have a real discussion/debate without getting exasperated. I like Calzaghe, and most of his fans are fine, but some people go on about him like he's being viewed as some kind of neo-Sven Ottke, which is not the case.

PS. I like Calzaghe, I was cheering for Calzaghe in the Hopkins fight and I likely would if they fought again. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time because it was such a close fight.
You judge the fight in a non biased way and your opinion is different from mine that is fine because you have logical points and a clearly judging the fight not the records or who is a legend and so,but alot of people are juding the fight on these silly things and not on the fight also alot of people here are fans and are making silly excuses.
If all people judged on boxing alone i would agree with you but alot do not so they should be told when there points are not valid no?