How did you score the Calzaghe vs Hopkins fight?

I gave it to Calzaghe he forced the fight all night and Hopkins tired badly around the 8th round. Seven - Five or 8-4 Joe.

 

Clear Calzaghe win. He basically did a better job of what Taylor did.

 

absolute lie, taylor didn't get floored and outboxed for half the fight. a better job doesn not involve getting knocked down on your ass, except on planet caltard.

and taylor fought primer fitter hop so he had to outbox Hopkinss rather than absorb Hopkins output and then win when he gassed out.

but sure joe won by a hairs breadth by outgassing the oldster.

 

whyyou write this is not true, and then lie straight after?

double liar u.

 

JC easily outworked Hopkins and in my opinion this bout wasn't even close.

 

Such an uninspiring slopfest of a fight.Calzaghe, despite manning up only late in his career, was years past his late 90s\early 00s peak as well.

Put either of them in with someone like a prime Jorge Ahumada and they would have been battered.Honestly in a strong light heavy era, this would never have been seen as a P4P kind of big event fight.A non-title ten rounder between two fighters outside-or at best just inside-the top ten and winding down their career's is what it would have been, and the fight itself showed it.

 

Calzaghe going away… just like those at ringside.

 

Calzaghe narrowly. Bernard landed the more effective shots which ordinarily would win my vote, but the activity levels were overwhelmingly in favor of Calzaghe in this case.

 

Exactly right. I had it the same way from the T&M.

Also in complete agreement. Calz had only one advantage in '08 and it was his engine. A physically prime Hopkins would have dominated him.

 

Calzaghe himself was 36 which is ancient for the style of fighter he was. A physically prime Calzaghe does even better.

 

Joe's engine was fine in '08. It was (is) his athleticism that is second to Hopkins. He couldn't time him, he fell for the same feints, and his defense is poor. Joe always had the same deficiencies from the Eubank fight until the Hopkins fight.

Joe lost the first half of the Kessler fight. Joe lost half of the Reid fight. That's his real level. But great career management and careful matchmaking ...

 

Name me a volume action fighter who was prime at 36. He was past it. As far as athleticism, Joe's style and abilities rely far more on athletic potential than Bernard's cutie stink-out-the-joint style. I mean, are head butting are faking low blows now Olympic events?

 

That argument would only carry a small amount of water if we weren't discussing Calzaghe/Hopkins. When your opponent is SEVEN+ years older and 43 it is an irrelevancy as it is a comparative state for both.

Also, "volume action fighter" is an acceptable description for prime Hopkins. See the irony?

Joe's "style" relied more on facing opponents with less athletic ability than himself. That is why he never improved his deficiencies. He struggled with too many guys in his prime (Starie (a horrible athlete), Sheika (very similar level to Calz - headbutt and a cut changed what might have been in a fight ended on a cut), Brewer (competitive), and Mitchell (premature stoppage after rocking him to his boots)) and it is clear that he would have been found out if faced with a prime version of Hopkins (or RJJ or Toney, etc.).

Your last line is ridiculous. Take it somewhere else. Hopkins was never deserving of a "cutie stink out the joint style" description in his prime.

 

Hopkins has been able to last so long exactly because he has an unathletic style. He is very much a cutie these days, also, using every old school (and some new) trick in the book to control pace in his fights. Calzaghe was able to take the reigns in this fight and push the pace, making Hop extremely uncomfortable.

I am curious as to how you measure "athletic"? The eye test perhaps? Or do you have some concrete standards on which to base this? Given Calzaghe's output and the fact he remained undefeated, I should think to rate him an exceptional athlete.