Negative Joe Calzaghe Comments

In the not too distant past, Hopkins beat the linear, legitimate, Light-Heavyweight Champion of the World in Antonio Tarver. Then he beat the linear, legitimate Middleweight Champion of the World in Kelly Pavlik. Not only did he beat these guys, he took them to school in the most embarassingly one sided way possible. And all this, as a fighter fast approaching his mid-40's. The idea that B-Hop "hasn't been P4P for a while" is TOTALLY bizzare.

 

Jones walked though the pitter patter punches too... err not.

I think the last two fights Joe was like Lewis and lost some of the desire. A good fighter I liked him, met him a few times and a decent guy. In terms of greatness he never really had that career defining fight (well apart from the Lacy whooping) against another P4P contender. He lost a lot of power later in his career and mixed up slappy combos with decent hooks.

His style was not too all peoples tastes, but no denying it was effective. He does get a lot of stick on here, maybe he ducked a few people BUT he was also ducked and not that many peeps are in the SMW division and maybe he stayed their too long...

 

so when was bhops prime? his chasing jones around a ring and fighting big bo wotever? his allen/vanderpool period? his slaying of the WW's i.e oscar? or his beatdown of the LHW and MW champ? u are basing prime on age (very silly) see tyson v lewis!

 

B-Hop's prime was in the peroid leading up to the MW unifaction fight. B-Hop is still a great fighter, but being well past his absolute peak has allowed lesser fighters like Calzaghe and Taylor to simply outwork him in recent fights.

 

Calzaghe & Taylor aren't really lesser fighters than the people Hopkins previously fought (except RJJ).

 

u keep telling yourself that sweetheart! was'nt JC nearly 37 himself? loving your mention of JT! firstly they were 'controversial' decisions! secondly is the fact that BH schooled the guy who beat JT twice not relevant? 'styles make fights' your words!

 

oh and the 'outwork him' comment! so those guys won simply because they could 'outwork him' nowadays! as opposed to before!!?? were hopkins had a high workrate right? cos bhop is known for his high output and not for his cagey spoiling style!

 

Not a Hopkins fan, I was actually rooting for Calzaghe when they fought. But I have 1 question for the loyal Calzaghe fans(also which I am not). Are you trying to say that a win over a 42 year old Hopkins is, in effect, a win over an ATG, prime fighter, and thus the kind of legacy building fight that catapults a fighter in ATG status himself?

 

You do know that those 2 victorys Taylor hold over Hopkins were highly controversail and very debatable

 

True,MrPR,my New York neighbor.However,I have 2 questions for you.1.If Hopkins were STILL PRIME,then how were these fights close in the first place when Hopkins is universally considered an ATG and Taylor is not?2.Why didn't Hopkins,the master technician,alter his gameplan just enough in the 2nd fight in order to take a decision?I firmly believe that a prime Hopkins easily decisions a prime Taylor any day of the week.I know styles make fights,but I just see Hopkins outpointing Taylor in their respective primes,in part because of a younger prime Hopkins' stamina being enough.

 

Pavlik and Tarver,good fighters both,are just that,good fighters,nothing more,nothing less at that level.Please just give me a straight answer.If Hopkins is still p4p,why did he lose not once,but twice to Taylor,BEFORE HE FOUGHT those 2.Please don't claim he was weight drained when he fought Bernard the 1st time.He came in at 156 against DeLaHoya only 10 months before the 1st Taylor fight.If prime Bernard fights prime Jermaine,Bernard boxes his ears off.

 

:good