When Calzaghe beat Hopkins

I had Hopkins by 4. Clean, effective punching is the only criteria that should count, and Hopkins edged easily more rounds on that basis.

 

Calzaghe NEVER EVER beat Bernard Hopkins only the corrupt judges thought so anyway. Thats why Slappy Joe ducked a rematch at home in Wales he knew he'd get his ass kicked BAD!!!!!!!!!!!

 

:nono No stop spouting **** again..

 

No. Not at all. Merely someone who scored clean punching, defense, and ring generalship (3 of the 4 scoring criteria) largely in favor of Hopkins. Calzaghe's only card to play would've been aggression, but seeing as it wasn't "effective aggression" to my eyes, he didn't score very highly for it.

I'm not painting it out as some kind of masterpiece performance from Hopkins. He did more to make it an ugly, *******ized affair than Calzaghe, really, but he scored better throughout, and by a clear margin. Of that I've little doubt, and thus he won the fight. In my humble minority opinion, anyways.

 

Only someone called Popkins could dream this..:deal

Your man lost get a grip he lost saturday too, blantley lost to taylor twice, get the violin out.

 

What was your scorecard for PAcal vs. Hopkins? :huh

 

no one in there right mind would say hopkins won that fight he claimed a low blow to buy himself time when Joe was starting to catch him, the man was a disgrace how the **** cortez let hopkins fight like that i will never know because he doesnt let any other boxer, wrestle head but in the inside. Cortez is a disgrace and so is anyone who gave that fight to hopkins..

 

Bernard needed a BS break in the 10th if i rememer correctly, an a little love (doggy style kind) to make it through that fight, not saying he was going to be stopped, but gee at that moment he was RUNNING for his life. He ran the whole fight, an guess what, i had it 116-111 for joe, an i know it a fair card, i was pissed cause i thought if hopkins would just trade a little he might get another KD, but he ran, an against a ATG, that is just a bad game plan.

 

I had it a round to Hopkins but to be fair its how you judge your knockdown rounds. It wasnt a robbery as suggested, there were some rounds you could of given either way and two knockdowns in pascals favour in Canada are yoou really surprised? And as for Joe.c and hopkins, Joe.c one that easily.

 

:good

 

I had it 8 rounds to 4 for Calzaghe but Hops had the 10-8 round at the start, so that would realistically make it 115-112 for Calzaghe.

 

People who say Calzaghe won on workrate and didn't land much are idiots.

Calzaghe's straight left was much better and landed much more regularly than Hopkins' straight right, that's how and why he won the fight.

 

What is wrong with your brain that you think these things have anything to do with how a fight is scored? :nut

Judges cannot sit at ringside and say "he just tried to buy himself time the *******, so I'm going to disregard the punches landed in this fight and score it 10-9 against him because I don't approve of such unsavoury tactics".

atsch

Boxing is not scored on who behaves the loveliest during the fight you idiot. It's scored on a set criteria - unless the referee deducts points it is utterly irrelevant how many dubious tactics any fighter employs.

 

Mine too. It's extremely reassuring to read a post from someone who actually understands how boxing should be scored.

:happy

 

It was effective aggression. Hopkins was a dead man by round 12.