Calzaghe's Win Over Bernard Hopkins

calzaghe by a long long way, man. it was a good win over a green hopkins for jones. but calzaghe beat the real hopkins.

 

You have listed some No Marks like Keith Holmes..? sort it out.

The wins that matter for Bernard Hopkins legacy where..

Oscar De La Hoya
Felix Trinidad
Kelly Pavlik
Antonio Tarver
Jean Pascal

These where and are his biggest fights, and classed as his best wins. The point i am trying to make is that Chris Eubank, Nigel Benn & James Toney especially James Toney have fought and beat better fighters.

Jermaine Taylor beat him twice, in the rematched he reduced Bernard Hopkins to throwing 10-12 punches per round at times.

Ronald Winky Wright was a 154 pound fighter, and the Hopkins fight could of went ether way even though he was fat and out of shape at 170.

During Bernard Hopkins Middle Weight he beat no real great fellow Middle Weights. My beef actually come to think of it is not with Eubank & Benn, it's Toney vs Hopkins resume and best wins.

But as a middleweight, i don't think Hopkins has beaten better fighters then Eubank or Benn did. Name me the fighters that Hopkins beat at Middleweight who where better than Nigel Benn himself and Iran Barkley for example..? None mate, because Hopkins middleweight reign is completely overrated.

But if you want to play the list game, James Toney's resume rips Bernard Hopkins resume apart, every knowledgeable boxing fan knows this. When it's about who beat the best fighters its James Toney who has a better resume than Hopkins.

James Toney best wins.

Mike McCallum x 2
Evander Holyfield....."Even though it was a old Holyfield, James Toney came from 160 to Heavyweight".
Iran Barkley
Doug Dewitt
Reggie Johnson
Michael Nunn
Vassiliy Jirov

 

Good win for Calzaghe, certainly not hurt by Hopkins subsequent form but probably a style "thing" more than anything else, Hopkins has struggled against busy fighters for years.

 

My post wasnt very clear but I was talking about the Calzaghe-BHop fight being a dirty, spoiling affair

Calzaghe-Eubank was a quality fight

 

This

A verteran cagey fighter who still had a lot left and still had some big wins after Calzaghe. I do think a prime Bhop wins because i think the things he struggled with most were Joe's workrate and flurrys.
Hopkins was old by conventional standards you will always have the freak who can keep going well past everyone else. Merlene Ottey won a silver medal in the relay in her 40's and im sure there are other examples of people who have lived the life of an athelete and can still be competive at sport in despite there age. Hell foreman was even older than Bhop and stil won the heavyweight belt.
People age quicker than others and some people adapt better to it. Great win over a great fighter. Its like getting an A in your exams if Joe had beaten a prime BHOP it would have been an A+

 

The fact that Hopkins went on to win two lineal titles after losing to Calzaghe means it was a great win

but the haters will always just ignore that and say "if hopkins was 5 years younger he would have ko'd calzaghe"

 

Yeah it was a good win, I was there!! :tong

Styles werent great and Hopkins was continually being dirty, IMO Calzaghe's workrate and ring control was what won him that fight.

Like other's have said B-Hop went on to achieve more which can only make the win better.

The Eubank fight is also a very good win as Calzaghe was on the way up and at that point in his career was his best win / best performance.

 

A prime hopkins beats Calzaghe?? please reiterate your point when mentioning the word Prime? Are you talking about the guy that Jones beat?

A common misconception by some is that prime means when a boxer is young or younger, but many boxers hit their prime at different ages. A young Hopkins gets bloody schooled by Calzaghe. Plus Hopkins pulled out of a signed fight with Calzaghe in 2002.

Hopkins Prime came later than say Jones`s did, Hopkins skillset is like that of a fine wine, but even in his prime i dont think he beats Calzaghe as you can say he was still kinda in his prime when he fought calzaghe. But at any stage in Hopkins career i think Calzaghe wins.

 

keith holmes was a world champ when they fought. he's also beaten some good fighters. that was good win.

i don't think anyone rates the de la hoya win at all. he lost to sturm big in his fight beforehand but they gave him the decision. oscar was crap at middle. the win means nothing.

james toney doesn't have a better resume at all.

he had two close fights with mcCallum. one of which i think he lost. most people have it one fight each.

holyfield was shot. yeah, he went up to heavyweight to do it so there is a little credit, but not much.

nunn dominated that fight until toney landed a left hook late on. i wouldn't give him too much praise if i were you.

dewitt ,barkley and jirov are good wins. but hopkins wins over trinidad, tarver, and pavlik are much better. don't even dare think otherwise.

the winky fight could of gone either way!? you really need to learn how to score fights properly.

you don't think hopkins has a better resume at middle than eubank?

he had a really weight drained benn. stretch and sherry ( who were pretty woeful) and a robbery against watson. that's it. you need to take your medication if you think eubanks resume at middle even begins to compare.

benns middle resume is dewitt, barkley, and a loss to eubank and watson. that doesn't compare either.

i don't know why you're talking about middleweight anyway. i was talking about overall resume, not just one division.

 

this. hopkins ducked a fight in 2002 when he got everything he asked for. still didn't want it. that was not calzaghe's fault.

people seem to forget that calzaghe wasn't in his prime when he and hopkins eventually got into the ring.

calzaghe beats any version of hopkins. he's just a better fighter.

 

calzaghe hit hopkins with f all. hopkins landed the cleaner punches. 6 rounds each, hopkins edged it with a knockdown. only 1 of the judges got it right

 

I think as a Middleweight Chris Eubank & Nigel Benn both beat better fighters than Bernard Hopkins beat......

As a middle weight name me a fighter who Hopkins beat who is better than...

Nigel Benn, Michael Watson, Gerald McClellan..? Hopkins two best wins at middleweight where against Welterweights, Felix Trindad was a one dimensional banger at welterweight and Oscar De La Hoya was fat and out of shape at middleweight.

So who is it then mate..? Who has Bernard Hopkins beat during his middleweight reign that was so better than any of Eubank's or Benn's wins...?

Keith Holmes is a no mark, Bernard Hopkins didn't really fight any real great middle weight fighters, that's why his whole legacy is built up on two pumped up Welterweights in Trinidad & De La Hoya.

Its why nobody! gave a **** about the middleweight Division during his title reign.

He faced one great middleweight..? And that was Roy Jones Junior and was beaten by him. The bottom line is that his middleweight career and reign was overrated, all the other great real middleweight fighters, where all beaten by James Toney, Chris Eubank, Nigel Benn, and Roy Jones Junior during that era.

Hopkins reign was in a no mark division, the entire 160-168 was reduced to a no mark division after James Toney, Roy Jones, Chris Eubank, Nigel Benn beaten off all the real great fighters. Roy Jones moved up in weight, and so did James Toney and the rest retired......

The point i am trying to make is that Bernard Hopkins middleweight reign is and was completely overrated. His whole legacy was built of his 20/21 defences, but he beat nobody.....nobody of any real Middleweight signification.

Name me a truly great middleweight win that Hopkins achieved..?

Felix Trinidad, Kelly Pavlik.....are not better than Arran Barkely, Michael Nunn, or Mike McCallum..........."Referencing to James Toney"

Go to the classic forum and make a thread, stating that Felix Trinidad & Kelly Pavlik where better fighters than Arran Barkely or Mike Mcalum.......and you will be ****ing laughed at you stupid idiot.

Are you having a ****ing laugh..? Felix Trinidad is not even a middleweight, he has no place among the great middleweights of the past.

Bernard Hopkins has stayed in the game for along time, but the fact of the matter is out of the other great middleweights/Light Heavyweights of his time. He has not fought and beat the better fighters.

James Toney, Chris Euabnk, Roy Jones, Nigel Benn.

All these guys have beaten guys who are better ether at middleweight or Light Heavyweight and above than any of Bernard Hopkins wins.

Hopkins does have good wins, but great wins..? against fellow great opposition..? Technically his best win his Antonio Tarver, he has lost to all of his other great competitors that where not catch weights or pumped up fighters from divisions below.

But his resume and legacy is enhance with his battle against age.......

He is a great fighter but..? He has not really beaten many other great fighters, Antonio Tarver is his greatest win technically.

 

there's so much **** wrong with your post but i'm not going to waste too much more of my time. i will point out a few of things though.

1) who's this great middleweight that jones beat? hopkins!? the hopkins that was green? get the hell out of here, man. who are the other greats he beat? i can't wait for this.

2) you claim that the slugger barkley is a better fighter than trinidad!? has a better overall resume!? is higher on the ATG list!? :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
now i know you're a ****ing clown!!

is monzon not a great middleweight? is hagler not a great middleweight? their best wins came against welters and ****ing lightweights as well. it's all right for them but not for hopkins? idiot.

that's the last post i'm going to make. you're clearly deluded.

 

I think he means at middleweight Barkey was superior to Trinidad. I think Barkley would spark Trinidad at Middleweight, brutalize him.