was hopkins closer to his prime then calzaghe in their fight? i think so...

I was being serious.:blurp

 

I find your arguments on this subject flawed. I am not going to continue hammering home the facts when it is clear your bias is colouring your opinion on this matter.

 

I understand where your coming from. I find your arguments flawed also. My opinion is a bit biased (if im honest), as is yours.
In truth I think they are 2 real good fighters, who ive always felt were quite even in what they have achieved, just when I see them as quite even, I feel more inclined to defend the one that gets the most critism, to put forward counter points, but alot of Hopkin fans are also very defensive and biased

 

No he wasn't.

 

You're not that woman off Setanta Sports News who said that Hopkins "wasn't a legend" because "he's lost before", are you?

 

I will freely admit Hopkins is my favourite fighter. I thought Calzaghe beat Hopkins and it wasn't even close.

In terms of acheivement I think Calzaghe is a level below Hopkins. In terms of actual fighting ability I think their pretty close, Calzaghe would have never been an easy opponent for Hopkins or anybody else. I think Calzaghe is still underated by some fans, the guy was a great all round fighter. I just think he came along to late. If he had been around when Benn, Eubank and Collins had been in their primes he would be seen quite differently.

 

To be fair, I think this fight gets unnecessary stick. It wasn't a great fight by any means, but there was a lot of skill involved and it was an interesting clash of styles that produced an undeniably competitive fight. Monzon/Benvenuti I got FOTY despite all the clinching!

 

Brighton bomber - We'll have to agree to disagree, but I appreciate your honesty

Itrymariti - No im not the women on Setanta.

I think Hopkins is a great fighter, but the reason I find them quite even is that alot of Hopkins big name wins (not all) were against naturally smaller fighters ie De La Hoya, Wright, Pavlik etc. Trinidad didnt look much of a MW but in fairness had come up from 2 divisions to win titles at WW, LMW & MW but did look smaller than Hopkins who started his career at LHW.
The times Hopkins has fought a real good 2 handed fighter his own size, (except for Tarver who had been beaten 3 times already) he has lost to Taylor twice, Jones and Calzaghe.
Whilst the names on Calzaghes record may not have been as marque in Reid, Woodhall, Eubank, Kessler, Lacy, Bika, Mitchell and Brewer and then later Hopkins and a faded Jones id say overall (but not in every case) they were a harder bunch to beat than G Johnson who was beaten by Sheika who Calzaghe beat, Joppy, Holmes, Eastman, and De La Hoya, Trinidad, Wright and Pavlik excellent fighters but naturally too small to beat the bigger guys, though I expect Pavlik with his frame to be able to grow into at least SMW in time.
But thats just an opinion

 

You previously wrote you were done with this thread.Couldn't resist,eh?

 

OK

 

Agree with your post about the rough times of their primes.

Though Hop went 12 with Vanderpool and Holmes in what you call his prime but you dig at Calzaghe's 12 with Thornberry in his 2nd year as champ, not prime.

Hop went 12 with Andrew Council in his 2nd year as champ, not prime.

Whats worse? Thornberry had 23 rounds with Ottke and Mundine. What did Mr Council do?

 

tell that to the calzombies