How did you score the Calzaghe vs Hopkins fight?

Sounds like the same foolishness I read from fools who actually contend that Ward was trying to headbutt Kessler. When you can find a trainer and a fighter that is practicing that in the gym get a camera and post it. I understand if you use your head enough it hardens and muscles develop.

Faking low blows

I give all athletes the benefit of the doubt if I hit them low and they say it bothered them. You have a different means of measuring when it warrants time and when it doesn't?

 

The first one is your ability to avoid your opponent's offense with head and body movement. Can you see the punch coming and get yourself out of the way. The second is your reactive ability. Neither of us is in a position of advantage. I shift or feint and you bite or don't bite and I commit and beat you to the punch - your hand to eye coordination is poor. The third is the quality of your offense. How accurate are you. How diverse are you - can you throw every type of punch. How is your technique.

Calzaghe's undefeated record means little in and of itself. You could be undefeated if we matched you against middlin' competition. Joe is not an exceptional athlete.

 

I don't think so. I'm sure BHOP would be happy to hear any "explanations" at how he has defied time and as long as it wasn't an accusation of cherry picking opponents would find some merit in your second sentence as well.

The reality is that Hopkins has had a long career because there is a lack of young talented men fighting in the US. If faced with a "normal" talent pool a fifty year old athlete is not going to be still in the mix. And, certainly not anywhere near the top. A "normal" environment in which young men are trying to become fighters means the young ones inevitably become experienced and can combine their knowledge, their youth, and their talent to defeat a fifty year old. Hopkins' post-40 career is the very proof of the decline of interest in boxing within the US.

Hopkins is either the most athletic to ever enter the ring or the sport is near dead in the US (and has been for a long while). Guile or style is simply not enough in a combat sport to overcome AGE for a decade plus.

 

Youre talking reflexes and skill mostly, the former being a tiny subset of overall athletic ability... to which I would add stamina, strength, endurance, speed.... a good fighter maximizes his assetd over his opponents', something which Bernard is usually successful at, though not when he fought Calzaghe.
Most of the rest you speak of is skill, punch selection, footwork, accuracy and the like. Bernard is immensely skilled.

 

That's fine. We are not so far apart. Everyone has their own take.

I would differ and say that there are poor athletes with good or great stamina. There are poor athletes with great strength. There are poor athletes with good endurance.

So, unless the athlete under discussion is sub-par in these areas they are less relevant or less than relevant in evaluating who has or what is exceptional or greater athleticism.

Even one of Joe's actual athletic strengths is often elevated more than appropriate. For example, Joe's fans would contend he has amazing hand speed. I'd say he has good hand speed but nothing extraordinary (not even remotely close to say a RJJ, SRL, etc.). In fact, near ringside, the 36 year old version didn't appear discernibly faster at all than the 43 year old he was facing. No one regards BHOP as exceptionally fast handed. Yet, Joe is consistently viewed that way. No one sensible would put his handspeed as comparable to RJJ's. But many on ESB regularly do. BHOP is not considered a speed merchant because there were some examples over here of guys that were undeniably fast. In Joe's "realm" the measuring stick was the Ottke, Reid, Beyer, Lucas, Kessler types. I don't have a system to measure his handspeed vis-a-vis others so why am I certain? Because he throws poorly - his technique is subpar. Joe's gloves are almost perpendicular to the X axis. They should be nearer 45 degrees in between perpendicular and parallel as they rise to impact. He is not the owner of a "slapping" label without any basis. It is why his speed does not translate into power (as it should). It is a "poorman's" handspeed that is flash without substance. By not "turning over" correctly it is just a pale imitation of the fighters he wishes to emulate or copy. If RJJ was not going to concern himself with landing clean and hurtful punches when flurrying but merely for effect with contact as incidental then surely he could rev up his motion to a blur.

It is Joe's innate athleticism (and comparative lack thereof) that is second to Hopkins (and others). Prime Joe is not a weak fighter. He is not a heartless fighter. He is a thinking fighter. But, he is not athletic enough to avoid getting hit. He is not going to "out-volume" an aggressive, active, more accurate, more technically sound (i.e., more than Joe) prime Bernard Hopkins. Young Joe ran into a tired, lethargic, weight cut Eubank's right repeatedly. He ran into an ancient Hopkins right. He ran into a spent RJJ's. He is not athletic enough to prevail with just heart and will and knowledge where endurance and stamina would not be factors (i.e., if faced with a physically prime version of the aforementioned fighters) and with this advantage being removed from the equation. His reactions, his coordination, his hand to foot diversity to move and throw without thinking is arguably not less developed just less innate. That is the difference between defeating (barely in a BHOP at 43's case) a (rare) better fighter due to the advantage of comparative youth who has continued to 50 - albeit in a terrible era overall - while the winner packed it in at almost fourteen years younger than BHOP rather than face having to adapt to age, declines in energy/activity levels, and the prospect of adversity and challenge.

From the vantage point of watching both careers from the get go and live as veterans - face to face - I can only conclude that Joe struggled too mightily with a terrible version of an old Hopkins to ever believe that a prime for prime matchup could ever go Joe's way.

 

calzaghe has fair skills, but they are far from elite. its his stamina that's elite, that and his management.

 

no.

calzaghes only,advantage over Bernie was that stamina (ie prevalent in a mans teens to early 30s, which is why he deliberately chose to fight the legends when they were pushing 40something instead of earlier LIKE EVERYONE DID-Calzaghe is the ONLY ONE who choose to do this).

and since that stamina allowed him to fight 12 rounds high pace, then extra stamina on top of that 12 round stamina would simply have not helped him against Bernard, since a 30something Bernard would himself have the extra stamina to match him.

what would have helped him are skills to not end up on his arse and get battered for the first half the fight. these Joe never had, even after 2 decades in the business.

JOe was at the peak of his experiences, and it wasn't enough, not nearly. He had to rely on Bernard's lack of lungs.

 

I'm not even going to argue if he won the fight or not. All the judges, announcers and virtually all at ringside had him winning comfortably.

What I am waiting for is the mention of one championship fighter whose style was based on pace and volume who was at his peak at 36. I have a feeling I will be waiting for quite some time.

 

Either 8-4 or 7-5 Hopkins for me, based on accurate punching.

Calzaghe got smarter and made less mistakes as he got older too. Incredibly conditioned for his age too. In his prime though Nard used to throw as much leather as Joe, which more dig behind his shots.

 

Thought Bernard just about knicked it with the knockdown; preferred his cleaner punching. Could have gone either way.

It doesn't sit right to say Calzaghe won clearly. There was a lot of unproductive following, few clean head shots, mostly a ragged type of persistence that ultimately won out due to Bernard's age related performance.

The Hopkins of 2001 works on the dent he made in round 1 for a unanimous decision.

 

100% agreed. Well summarized.

 

Calzaghe made a huge mistake in round 1. Until the end of his career, he seemed to get ahead of himself at times and over commit on attacking.


In what fight did Bernard ever throw as much leather as Joe? Joe threw 700+ punches against Bernard. Bernard threw 320 against Jones, Jr., 430 against Lupe Aquino… When did he ever throw 700+?

 

Clazaghe won by clear margin. Calzaghe landed 232 punches, almost double the amount of punches landed by Hopkins (127). I also think Clazaghe hurt Hopkins with a legal punch. Hopkins faked a low blow.

The only judge that gave it Hopkins was Adaliaide Byrd, who's a noted bad judge that gives it to the wrong person often by one point or calls a draw to mitigate controversy.

Want some examples of her crap cards? Read below:


2012, Apr. 14 - Brandon Rios vs. Richar Abril for the WBA World Lightweight Title - Byrd was the only judge to score in favor of Abril who lost via split decision. Many felt Abril won the fight and her score was correct. Scores: Jerry Roth 116-112, Glenn Trowbridge 115-113, Adalaide Byrd 111-117

2011, May 7 - Kelly Pavlik vs. Alfonso Lopez - Byrd was the only judge to not score the bout for Pavlik, instead having it as a draw. Scores: Adalaide Byrd 95-95, Richard Houck 98-92, C.J. Ross 99-91.


2009, Apr. 24 - Cory Spinks vs. Deandre Latimore for the IBF Light Middleweight Title - Byrd and Steve Weisfeld had the bout for Spinks, while Jerry Jakubco scored in favor of Latimore. Scores: Adalaide Byrd 115-112, Steve Weisfeld 114-113, Jerry Jakubco 112-115.


2009, Apr. 17 - Selcuk Aydin vs. Said Ouali - Byrd was the only judge to score in favor of Ouali. Scores: Jerry Roth 116-111, Robert Hoyle 115-112, Adalaide Byrd 113-114.

2008, Sep. 5 - Antonio DeMarco vs. Jose Reyes - Byrd was the only judge to score the bout for Reyes. Scores: Patricia Morse Jarman 96-93, Robert Hoyle 95-94, Adalaide Byrd 93-96.

2008, Apr. 19 - Bernard Hopkins vs. Joe Calzaghe for The Ring Magazine Light Heavyweight Title - Byrd was the only judge to score in favor of Hopkins. HBO's Harold Lederman scored the bout 116-111 for Calzaghe. Scores: Ted Gimza 112-115, Adalaide Byrd 114-113, Chuck Giampa 111-116.


2006, Apr. 8 - Wes Ferguson vs. Josesito Lopez - Byrd was the only judge to score it for Lopez. Scores: Chuck Giampa 95-93, Robert Hoyle 97-92, Adalaide Byrd 94-95.

2004, Sept. 4 - Lamon Brewster vs. Kali Meehan - Byrd was the only judge to score in favor of Meehan. Scores: Adalaide Byrd 113-114, Dave Moretti 114-113, Nelson Vazquez 115-113.

2003, Mar. 1 - Vonda Ward vs. Martha Salazar (1st meeting) - Byrd was the only judge to score it in favor of Salazar. Scores: Richard Houck 39-37, C.J. Ross 39-37, Adalaide Byrd 37-39

 

^ Interesting post. Many judges if you score a lot of fights will disagree with your two counterparts on occasion but those fights listed some were not close and it makes you wonder Adelaide's competency.

 

Well, Kazakhstan have provided some incredible boxers over the laat 20 years. Very much thriving over there in terms of the talent they are churning out.

Sure, Shumenov isn't great, but Shumenov diffused him easier than Campillo even did.