Hopkins won against Calzaghe

i agree

 

I think it balances itself out tbh, there are 'haters' and 'nuthuggers' on both sides with their own agenda...

It's generally agreed that Calzaghe won the fight, and as I do not believe it's a decision that can ever be rendered 'a robbery', I think boxing fans should recognise and accept that Joe Calzaghe beat Bernard Hopkins on that night.

Besides, looking at the bigger picture, both guys are ATGs in the twilight of their careers....yet there are still fine matches that can be made for both of them, legacy enhancing bouts.

I'd like to see Calzaghe face Dawson and I wouldn't be opposed to Hopkins making good on his proposal to take on 'another robotic white boy' in Adamek....just think what a win over the recognised 1# Cruiser could do for him.

 

An Adamek fight would be cool as would a Kessler match. I'd still prefer a rematch though.

 

damit i wonder how many threads theyve been on this fight calzaghe won in b hops backyard fair and square get over it

 

Of course you would, so would Bernie. The loser always wants a remtach since they have nothing to lose.

 

I just feel there is unfinished business, do you have a problem with that Klitschko fanboy?

 

:good that so very true.

 

Blade, this has already been discussed to death on this board and obviously with the large amount of Calzaghe nuthuggers it doesn't lead anywhere...

I had Hopkins winning by 1 point. Six rounds to six, with the knockdown that makes a 114-113 score for Hopkins.
In the end, it's obvious that it was a very close fight - maybe we can say it could have gone either way, depending on how you score fights. Calzaghe was more active and had his moments, plus he finished stronger; but Hopkins started well, he scored fewer but more effective punches and he never was in trouble. I wouldn't say Hopkins controlled the whole fight because Calzaghe fought at his pace after round six, which was too fast for Hopkins liking but he couldn't slow him down. But Calzaghes flurry punching is getting overrated - don't get me wrong, the man can punch when he wants to, but these flurries are not very effective and they form a large part of his style. It looks good but is not that effective. Hopkins punches were cleaner and had more effect, which showed when he knocked Calzaghe down in the 1st and buzzed him again in the 7th. And remember Calzaghe has a good chin. Hopkins fell back into his old habit of doing the minimum that is required in the second half of the fight, which was a big fault against a pressure fighter like Calzaghe. Maybe he couldn't do more anymore, but he still won the first half of the fight, at least 5 rounds.

We can all agree that this fight screamed for a rematch, but Calzaghe wants none of that. Which is a shame. He wants no part of Hopkins now, even less after seeing a rejuvenated Hopkins dismantle Pavlik. And I can't understand the Calzaghe fans defending their man for not taking that rematch, they should ask for it to happen instead - and why not in the UK?

Calzaghes best win is still against Mikkel Kessler, and that was indeed a great win. Mikkel Kessler was in his prime, he is underrated and dangerous. Calzaghe didn't beat Hopkins in my book, and Roy Jones was shot when they met.

 

none of them even used this mind bending theory until jerry roth went on record useing it as an excuse as to why he gave the first 3 rounds of 4 rounds to trinidad agianst delahoya ...so they can just stop trying to sound smart right now cause they're sounding ridiculous instead

 

Calzaghe went down but i dont think he was ever hurt.

Anyway Joe won clearly and now he has grown into the weight i see it being lopsided if they meet again.