If Hopkins challenged and fought Calzaghe at 168 in 2002, but in US...

Oh dear !!!!!!!!!! atschatschatschatschatschatschatsch

 

the ass grinding in round 10 made me laugh,the flying in with headbutts,the phantom low blows,timewasting,hanging on the ropes for 12 rounds and refusing to engage,the self denial at the end all added to my amusement of that shitfest,rehabilitated my arse!

messy but clear calzaghe victory.

 

:good:good:good:good:good:good

 

Hopkins in 2008 was able to handle Calzaghe technically. But he didnt have the stamina to keep it up for 12 rounds against Calzaghe's high workrate. So in 2002 it has to be Hopkins.

 

A younger Hopkin si more likely to engage Calzaghe. Joe wins a close decision again, but in a better looking fight...

 

calzaghe decision

 

I think Hopkins would edge out a razor-thin decision personally, but I have no issue with people thinking Joe would take it. He would have given BHop more respect at this time and wouldn't have been at a size disadvantage, so I can't see him getting dropped like he did.

Both men were better skilled when they did actually meet, but in 2002 Joe would have had better hands and more pop, while Hopkins would have had better stamina, and wouldn't have faded so much. Which is the main issue, I feel. Calzaghe's relentless swarming style was too much for Hopkins to handle at 43, but a younger Bhop would have managed better.

 

I think Calzaghe would have still won it back in 2002. Hopkins has always had problems with fighters with fast hands and high workrates as shown in his other losses to Taylor and Jones. Calzaghe has both traits to trouble Hopkins and a awkward style with crazy stanima to go along with it, so I say Calzaghe still wins an 8-4 or 7-5 type decision

 

Hopkins shut out Joe for the best part of 6-7 rounds.

Hed be fresher more aggressive would likely win 8 rounds and also chance of stopping Joe.

 

I went for fence sitter, Calzaghe was facing lesser opponents, but it was a time he could still punch with power.

 

Hopkins did everything in his arsenal to beat Calzaghe, he fought the perfect fight within his own skillset & still lost, albeit a close fight.

He would either do the same thing in their primes & lose another close one or open up a bit more & lose wider, Calzaghe beats Hopkins 8/10 times for me.

:good

 

Yep, me too but I`ll keep quiet & enjoy laughing at them when they do decide to post.... & if they dont post, I`ll know they have read your post.

 

calzaghe at 168? hopkins defeated imo

 

I dont think the weight will be a big issue.

Hopkins looked great when he made the jump to 175 in 2006 so why couldnt he make a smaller jump to 168 when he is younger and also look good there?

Hops lost to Calzaghe due to workrate, he countered him nicely but didnt do it enough to win the rounds. You seen how well his defense worked so with a bit more stamina and activity I can see him taking this to a UD.

 

:rasta