Revisionist History with Hopkins?

plenty more?? wow! you're making my point for me. if lesser fighters like dawson and taylor beat hopkins too, what does that say about joe's win?

 

Hill, Foreman, Frazier, Marciano, Turpin etc etc...

you were saying? :think

 

dude, you're wrong.

and a liar.

just under 3000 Brits went over there for the fight. it was reported over here in the UK. how do i know?? because of how many tickets were sold.

 

i would put calzaghe ahead of virgil hill and turpin if i had a list but the other three are clearly better. frazier did more in one fight than joe's entire career, easily.

 

Hopkins doesn't have as good wins on his record as Calzaghe, if Calzaghe's best win is Hopkins himself then Hopkins best win is not as good as Calzaghe's best win. Don't forget Calzaghe beat unbeaten multiple champions in Lacy and Kessler in unification bouts when they were at their prime.

Hopkins resume is full of fighting small men up in weight at the end of their careers like Trinidad a career Welterweight and DLH a Lightweight.
Hopkins lost to a green Roy Jones in Jones first title fight, what are Hopkins best wins ?

 

we're not spotless when it comes to being fair, but we are the fairest by far when it comes to giving the right decisions to the right fighters.

our history backs that up as well.

 

bull****. i sat in the middle of all the welsh fans there. you could count the hopkins fans on your fingers. here's a quote straight from calzaghe. you're embarrassing yourself with this argument.

http://www.secondsout.com/columns/thomas-hauser/joe-calzaghe-the-legend-beater

On fight night, Calzaghe was the de facto hometown fighter. “It’s amazing,” he said. “Brits are the best supporters in the world. You wouldn’t get ten thousand Americans to come over to the UK to watch a fight no matter how big you are.”

Ten thousand Americans didn’t go to the Thomas & Mack Center either. The announced attendance was 14,213. But a lot of tickets were given away, while others were sold by Planet Hollywood at a steep discount.

 

how can i argue with this logic. haha! i guess it's impossible for hopkins to fight himself.

 

just gave the link a read.

you base the corruption in the UK on ONE, yes ONE, fight????

that could quite easily be the most pathetic reply to an argument i've ever heard.

 

jesus christ. it's time i stop responding to you. you're clearly not concerned about the truth of things. the brits have so many disgraceful moments in boxing history. why don't you ask hagler?

 

I wouldn't say that it's his best win. It was Kessler, who was the undefeated unified champion at the time.

Also, a big majority scored it for Calzaghe at the time, if you are saying that most of the people had it for Hopkins, it's not true. I had scored it 8-4 to Calzaghe and didn't personally know anyone who had Hopkins winning, and in my opinion there can't be made any case for Hopkins being the winner.

 

**** for brains. i've said it's been going on for 200 years. that was the first example.

 

it says they were good enough on the night. well, Taylor was in one fight at least.

Hopkins was too old by the time Dawson got to him.

lesser fighters have beaten Foreman. what does that say about Ali??

nice try in spinning to suit. but i'm sorry, you'll always fail that argument. if you know your boxing history of course. :good

 

wake me up when kessler makes the hall of fame. the hopkins win is greater.

 

so age is a factor in some fights?