the truth about bhop and calzaghe...

I'm no Calzaghe fan (wasted talent but thats another story) but credit where its due,Calzaghe dominated BHop and only a blind hater would say otherwise,he out worked him,out punched him,frustrated him and ultimately beat him.As for ineffective punching,check my avatar.:good

 

Watching this fight again is horrible. B-hop did absolute nothing in that fight except landing some contras now and then. B-Hop is a borring fighter - Hopkins being anyones hero in this forum is beyond my understanding.

Hes old he spoils the fights with dirty tricks, he hadnt got the stamina to fight Joe and for that reason alone he deserved too loose. Calzaghe fougt a terrible fight too but at least he tried to make a fight out of it.

ahhh forgot he was from Amerika - the poor ******* havnt got a sigle fan outside the states.

 

Since when does a highly disputed split decision win against a 43 year old man count as "ownage"? :think

 

I suspect quite a lot of things are "beyond your understanding".

 

Who disputed the decision?? The Yank judge who voted for the Yank fighter??

Lewis Holyfield was disputed too right?? That was when the Yank judge voted for the Yank fighter. :hi: Calzaghe46-0 = legend

 

Actually, Larry O'Connell (of London, England) scored the first Lewis-Hoyfield fight 115-115, which resulted in the draw.

So you're incorrect, when you suggest that the definitive factor in that particular fight was a "yank judge voting for a yank fighter".

I suppose you're unaware of the fact that all three judges for Calzaghe/Hopkins were American, and two of them had Calzaghe winning. Stupid yanks always "voting" for the yank fighter, eh?

You sound naive/ignorant for not acknowledging that Calzaghe's 'w' over Hopkins is a highly disputed issue.

Also, if being 46-0 makes Calzaghe a "legend", then Sven Ottke should be afford the same equally legendary status.

 

I have no idea how anyone could credibley suggest that Calzaghe "dominated" Hopkins, or vice-a-versa. Have you actually seen the fight?

It was a horrible, scrappy, affair in which there was no clear winner, and the decision came down to subjective debate on whether you value clean effective punching more than workrate and punch output.

 

i dont think so he was much better about 7 years ago when he could still punch. he was actually pretty good back then but what he is getting cred for is the last few years of his career. what is laughable thing is that people think he is top 100 atg for his win against a 43 year old man and a shot jones.

 

people may say what they like that hopkins is a freak of nature etc. no he is no freak of nature and he is getting old. hopkins as well was much better around 7 years ago and that hopkins would have beaten calzaghe with ease.

 

More than once.:good

 

You're right.

If Joe is an ATG then so is Sven Ottke.:deal

 

Where is Eugenia Williams from?? Pecham?? :huh Not even Sven Ottkes dad thought he beat Robin Reid. Disputed decisions against Brewer and Larsen. A silly attempted comparison.

 

Prime Calzaghe for me, probably means Lacy. He was slightly past prime when he fought Bernard. As you mention Calzaghe's hand troubles had become more actue by that time.

 

Williams didn't have the deciding card. The British judge did. You should think these things through before you post :good

 

el dinamita just admit your a clown and stop posting on here y' fool.


why do you keep changing the names of your accounts *****?

-hoya uk to el cepillo
-pacfan to dinamita

sad coward.still cant keep of the calzaghe threads huh?