Hopkins v Calzaghe

I just watched this fight for the second time (first time live). I remember thinking it was an ugly fight, with Calzaghe winning close.

Watching it again, Hopkins won it easily. Calzaghe landed almost nothing. This fight is a perfect example of BS compubox numbers, biased commentary, and crowd influence. Hopkins looked discouraged and struggled with the pace, but he clearly landed the punches. His low blow nonsense and Calzaghe’s bravado obviously influenced observers.

At the end of the 11th round Enzo was screaming at Joe telling him that round was the first round that he showed up for. He was also telling Joe that he needed a knockout.

It wasn’t even a close fight. Similar to the first Pac-Bradley fight, BS compubox numbers, an aggressive fighter missing, commentators and crowd with bias who can’t see what’s happening.

Hopkins 117-110

 

There is nothing controversial about the fight. Calzaghe won fairly easily, other than the knock-down, of course.

First instincts are usually right.

 

No they’re not, my eyes are able to see and understand boxing better with an additional ten years of viewing. I was also a Calzaghe fan at the time, and due to the ugly nature of the fight and Hopkins acting and racial bias I clearly had a distorted view of it.
Calzaghe got comprehensively beaten, Hopkins really did make him look like an amateur.

 

I am fascinated by this fight but see it completely different than how you described.

For comparison, I have watched this fight 3 times:
once live on TV with all my homeboys..
Once about 10 years later by myself on YouTube TV,
And once about a year ago on my phone....
I don't remember if they were all the same broadcast or not, but my takeaway from the fight was the same every time:

Calzaghe survived the first round knockdown to gradually work his

 

No, Hopkins took that L. Close for sure though.

 

I had Calzaghe winning but have no plans to rewatch it, ever. That fight sucked, and neither man looked good. I give you credit for re-watching it dealt_with, but man, that's a hard pass for me. There's a reason Hopkins was a 4-1 underdog in the Pavlik fight that followed it, and it wasn't just that Pavlik looked good vs Taylor.

Calzaghe threw a ton of punches like an amateur, and Hopkins kept looking for a way out after throwing 30 punches a round and clinching exhausted him. It was like watching a Klitschko fight if Klitschko was hung over and lost his punching power.

If I rewatched it, who knows, maybe I'd change my mind, but I'm happy living with however my brain's interpreted what happened that day.

 

The thing is if we score clear punches (as we should) then there is no way you can give the fight to Calzaghe. Calzaghe continuously moved forward taking counter rights and getting clinched, while landing occasional glancing slaps.

Even though I gave 3 rounds to Calzaghe they could still be scored for Hopkins, that's how ineffective Calzaghe was. I challenge anyone to mention a round they think Calzaghe clearly won and we can analyse it.

 

What 7 rounds?

 

Joe won easily, the white boy smashed the yank, deal with it.

 

117-110 ? Are you serious? Which fight did you watch?

 

What rounds did Calzaghe win?

 

I’m white and not a yank. Hopkins gave him a boxing lesson.

 

You'd better watch it again carefully. The score might be better than 117-110.

 

First time I watched it I thought it was a 50-50 fight. Second time I realised that Calzaghe actually outlanded Hops by far. Hopkins made zaggers look bad compared to how he usually looked, but that doesn't mean he lost.