No one can convince themself that Hopkins wouldn't do the same the second time round. Just like Hopkins fighting the same old **** when he fought Taylor the second time. When Hopkins looks better i.e. Pavlik it is because of the opponent not because he has decided to fight differently. In the rematch Calzaghe would still be all over him and should Hopkins fight differently i.e. engage more, that would simply do better for Joe!
Except Hopkins would land more punches this time (effectively) and Calzaghe would still mostly be bashing away at thin air, hands and elbows...
There's another Gaz on the forum! After the first few rounds of the Hopkins fight I was thinking '****! Joe is out of his depth here, he's not on Hopkins level'. But then he turned it round and won by a point on my card IIRC.
Every time you punch, you become open. It is a risk v reward situation. The more X punches, the more he is open to one of Calzaghes slaps.
That is very true. However I believe Hopkins is of a better class, and Joe isn't really accurate and neither does he pick his shots. He just flurries and hopes. Hopkins wouldn't get caught by much of any note (i.e clean, effective and hurtful punches). This, in relation to what he would land on Joe, would swing it in his favour as he starts to hurt Joe and bust him up.
Thats your credibility all gone in one sentence. Nobody 'flurries and hopes' their way to 46-0, unifying his division, 2 weight ring champion and beating a lot of top class opposition on the way. He beat Bernard Hopkins end of story get over it. Hopkins deserved **** all from that fight, his antics on the night and afterwards was a disgrace.
Maybe you need to watch a lot of Calzaghe's fights more closely, even in slow motion if you have to, and compare the amount of punches that actually land with the legal, scoring part of the glove on a legal, scoring part of the opponent's body compared to the ones that don't......
I'd be quite happy if Calzaghe didn't fight again. There are much bigger and better fights out there for Hopkins.
maybe you should be a little less nieve gaz, dont you think it would have been picked up and investigated by now if their was thought of cheating, besides the fact if he was merely slapping he would have surely been beaten by now as lacy has laid claim he slaps hard
This content is protected ..:nut 3;Avatar of Joe getting clipped 4;A total of 8 Posts, all of them slating Calzaghe...... = +1 For the 'I hate Joe Calzaghe' Club :verysad
1. Accuracy is a term relevant to output. You throw enough ****, some's bound to stick. 2. Fantasy? I must have imagined Joe getting knocked square on his arse then. 3. Yeah, and it's a hell of a "clipping" wouldn't you say! 4. Thanks for reading! :thumbsup = hell, I'm the damn PRESIDENT of the club ,son!
Can't believe we're still on about this. I know there are some real Calzaghe haters on here but surely as fans of the sport they can analyse the two fighters for what they are. The fact is Hopkins would not beat Calzaghe in a month of Sundays. The reason is because he is a fighter who does not throw a lot of punches and looks to open up his opponents and land effective counter punches. He clearly was not able to do this against Calzaghe, the first two rounds aside, and resorted to cringeable spoiling tactics. The result of this was that he effectively managed to stop Joe from landing meaningful shots and led some to deem the fight as close. However, crucially, he landed nothing of note himself. This combined with the cheating, spoiling tactics, added the fact that he spent the entire fight on the backfoot meant that the verdict could only go one way.
Kawazaki did! Any half decent fighter can succeed if matched so uncompetitively Look at Peter McNeely, Lou Savarese, Nadeem Siddique, Adnan Amar, Brian Nielson, Eric Jakubowski etc Half of them couldn't fight their way out of a can. Put a talented fighter in with flawed opposition, what happens?