Hopkins would have beaten Calzaghe decisively in a rematch. Yes/No?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Exposed, May 22, 2011.


  1. Justaman

    Justaman Guest

    :patsch

    oh....65% of ESB' posters don't know ****.
     
  2. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,980
    3,110
    Dec 11, 2009
    To think Hopkins couldnt beat Taylor in 2 fights so I dont know why people think Hopkins could beat Calzaghe in a return
    Its funny how Hopkins had J Taylor badly hurt and in a daze in the first Hopkins/Taylor fight and Hopkins losing twice to Taylor doesnt hurt those Hopkins nuthuggers half as much as Hopkins being beaten by Calzaghe at a new weight, in America with 3 American judges, Cortez as ref landing more on Hopkins than anyone ever and scoring the single highest card against Hopkins ever, denying Hopkins his usual strong finish and having Hopkins hanging on holding.
    Consider with the official cards that Calzaghe in 1 fight, was more points ahead of Hopkins than Taylor was in 2 fights with Hopkins..

    Wonder why Calzaghe beating Hopkins hurts his fans so much, either way they have to live with the fact that Hopkins lost and Calzaghe won. They hang on to this, but if you go to Google and put in A Byrds name, just see what comes up and remember that the other 2 judges scored 9 rounds the same.

    Anyway Hopkins doesnt have any wins on his resume as good as Eubank and undefeated Kessler and Calzaghe also has the win over Hopkins.

    Accept it Hopkins lost,
     
  3. assasin

    assasin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,315
    13
    Feb 21, 2010
    who gives a damn what your girl says?

    hay, everyone on ESB, this can be put to bed now because canibus81's girl thought hopkins won. good job you came, or this would of continued for years.

    p.s. you should get your girl to apply for a judging licence, she sounds great.
     
  4. assasin

    assasin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,315
    13
    Feb 21, 2010
    do you think that hopkins would of gone to wales for the rematch? cos i don't. he would of made excuses about going there and then argued that the fight should take place in the states for a second time.

    calzaghe didn't think he lost. he KNOWS he won. why would he want another ugly fight like that? hopkins running and fouling. no thanks. let the racist stew. he deserves it.

    chuck giampa hates hopkins now does he? care to prove that?
     
  5. SteelShoulders

    SteelShoulders Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,009
    235
    Jan 26, 2009
    lol calzaghes punches werent even straight most of them were wild n slapping, you guys nuts?
     
  6. HEADBANGER

    HEADBANGER TEAM ELITE GENERAL Full Member

    13,630
    655
    Oct 17, 2009


    :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
     
  7. AnotherFan

    AnotherFan Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,221
    2
    Dec 20, 2010
    Despite your analyze, Hopkins hand speed is to low to defeat Joe. To say that Hopkins would win "decisively" sound like pure wishfull thinking, similar to the ones where yanks daydream about what a prime Jones would have done to Joe.

    It is very telling that some fans are convinced that Hopkins would have defeated Calzaghe effortslessy both before and after they fought for real. Why bother about reality when imagination is so much sweeter?

    This poll is therapy.
     
  8. HEADBANGER

    HEADBANGER TEAM ELITE GENERAL Full Member

    13,630
    655
    Oct 17, 2009
    people need to put into perspective calzaghe's mindset towards the end of his career. he'd talked about retirement for a while and was constantly talking that the only thing that could beat him was complacency and that he was struggling to get up for fights and struggling to motivate himself to go back in the gym.

    he thought he was gonna beat hopkins easy despite moving up weight and fighting in america, and that was a big mistake in itself in hindsight, he admits he cut corners in training. then came the hopkins fight and there was only one person interested in making a fight that night, hopkins fought as ugly as it gets and after calzaghe had won he basically recieved **** all credit for the victory because everyone was saying hopkins was too old anyway. at the time, that fight kind of damaged calzaghe's legacy but years later the victory has grown because hopkins continued schooling the likes of pavlik and pascal.

    after the hopkins fight, calzaghe had totally made up his mind he had one fight left and obviously wanted a big payday. what was the point of fighting hopkins again, he had already beat him, he would recieve no credit for beating him again, and hopkins would spoil and try to break every rule in the book again and give the fans another ugly fight in his last fight.

    he decided to fight jones instead, for more money, and in a fight where both fighters would look to be aggressive and entertain. some may have viewed it as an easy payday for calzaghe, maybe it was, but at 36 calzaghe was past his peak, especially for a fighter who relied on workrate and had brittle hands.

    as for fighting dawson in his last fight? calzaghe would have recieved a quarter of the money for doing that because dawson is not a draw in britain or america. if calzaghe had of schooled him, he would have probably got the lacy card thrown at him again. in a way, i wish calzaghe had of taken the dawson fight because i think he would have ****ed dawson up big time but thats just my opinion.
     
  9. AnotherFan

    AnotherFan Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,221
    2
    Dec 20, 2010
    Uh ... you must be new here on ESB. Just for your information: Joe did not duck Hopkins. Actually they fought.

    Cheers.
     
  10. DOM5153

    DOM5153 They Cannot Run Forever Full Member

    12,340
    1
    Jan 9, 2009
    He would always land cleaner blows because Calzaghe's hands were broke to ****, i thought this was a mute subject and largely accepted. Calzaghe could'nt even throw a hard straight shot during the final stage of his career, oh and Calzaghe out-thought and outfought Hopkins in the ring despite moving up in weight and looking worse off for it. The only rounds Hopkins won clearly were the 1st 2 before Calzaghe took the fight to Bhop. Sorry Calzaghe beats any version of Hopkins.
     
  11. Brit Sillynanny

    Brit Sillynanny Cold Hard Truth Full Member

    2,653
    4
    May 1, 2009

    No kidding? I wasn't sure when I drove from my home in Summerlin to watch the fight that night at the Thomas & Mack ... who I was going to see.:patsch

    You have comprehension issues when you read eleven words in the thread header and need to place the response in context?

    Cheers.
     
  12. Sunchild78

    Sunchild78 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,721
    50
    Sep 25, 2009
    After what Hopkins have been doing of late. I would say hell yeah. Can someone please get Calzaghe out of retirement.
     
  13. EJDiaZ

    EJDiaZ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,213
    420
    Aug 21, 2010
    B-Hop loses again..
     
  14. Exposed

    Exposed *** East Side VIP **** Full Member

    2,312
    1
    Jan 20, 2007
    Obviously this thread has riled up the Calzaghe defense troup, as was its explicit purpose. You want to lambast anti-Calzaghe sentiment yet you're completely blind to your own judgemental bias as your post clearly shows.

    Let's start with your statements of Hopkins antics during the latter half of the fight. Easy for the Calzaghe defense troup to call foul play, yet COMPLETELY ignore Calzaghe's DELIBERATE foul in the second round? Calzaghe ADMITTED he was hurt by the 1st round knockdown, there was nothing "flashy" about that. A perfect straight right hand put Calzaghe on his ass, and he fought the rest of the round and the next couple rounds tentatively. That low blow in the second was a direct retaliation.

    His own words: "When I hit him there in the second round, that was proper deliberate. He'd knocked me down in the first so I had to give him a dig, didn't I? "

    Oh, the irony :roll:

    - Show me ONE official BBC link from any BBC analyst that had Calzaghe winning.

    - The majority of sports media outlets had either Hopkins winning or a draw. Only nutsuckers like yourself claim "Calzaghe won easily", when any right minded unbiased boxing expert sees the fight exactly the way it went: Hopkins threw the more telling, crisp clear blows, while Calzaghe relied on pitty patty flurries that hit air and shoulders to sway judgement. This one aspect you Calzaghe cocklickers can never hide, the fact how the boxing media is split concerning this fight, with the majority of them favoring Hopkins. Now, what the **** does a poll prove? A poll is nothing but a popularity contest where biased ****s like yourself can skew and vote, like this poll shows.

    I do find it funny how many Brits claim a second fight wouldn't have been necessary, especially how Hopkins showed a clear improvement over the last few years. It seems you damn well know in your hearts Hopkins would have won a rematch, yet its quite easy to dismiss because the first fight all ready happened. According to this logic, all the rematches in the history of boxing should never have happened. Pacquio shouldn't have fought Morales after he lost, Azumah Nelson shouldn't have fought Jeff Fenech after the controversial first, Holyfield shouldn't have fought Bowe after he lost the first time, etc... Typical Brit nutthuggin logic...a logic held behind a subconscious fear of their hero actually losing a second time around. :roll:
     
  15. assasin

    assasin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,315
    13
    Feb 21, 2010
    your post is ****. just like all the others. but there's one thing that stood out that surprised me.

    you claim that hopkins showed a clear improvement over the last few years.

    do you believe this rubbish you're writing?

    there has been no improvement from hopkins since the calzaghe fight. in fact, what's happened, is hopkins has gone into the ring with fighters that are no where near the level of joe.

    pavlik: one dimensional. made for hopkins. he could do what ever he wanted with this style.

    pascal: crap stamina. fights in bursts. doesn't bring pressure. lets hopkins fight at a pace that suits him.

    none of these guys are calzaghe are they? that's the difference!!

    too much time has been wasted on a little ***** like you already. so it's a case of BYE BYE idiot. i wish you luck in your jealous, bitter, calzaghe hating campaign.

    :hi: