What is the formula needed to beat Calzaghe ?

Some feel Hopkins came close , or even some feel Hopkins beat Calzaghe , but he didnt do enough to pursuade the judges. Due to Joe letting his hands go constantly some landing some not throughout the round its obviously hard for the judges not to give him the round , so what is the forumla to earn yourself a clear decision win against the awkward man from Wales ?

 

Why not just knock him out?

 

Straight right counters and leads, Joe's a sucker for them.

 

A non-stop, pressuring, perpetual motion machine like a big Henry Armstrong or a Joe Frazier.

 

:good

 

if joe would have fought much better guys then we would know

i still think hopkins beat him by a point

kessler is joes biggest win

benn , eubank , collins , jones jnr , toney , hopkins from the 90s alone all beat joe

 

Dam beat me too it ..Jones and Hopkins hit him clean with those ..

 

Maybe someone like G-Man or Benn, more likely the former would be able to connect with heavy enough punches to get Joe out of there early. Gerald liked to start fast and would try and press early on. He also had a good beard. I could maybe see him walking down Calzaghe and being able to KO him with a right lead. However, as any hypothetical fight wore on between the two, Joe becomes favourite.

I think against nearly any fighter, if you don't knock Calzaghe out, then his stamina, workrate, and sheer awkwardness lands you in trouble. I can't think of any fighters who could have pressed Calzaghe over the whole distance and outwork him.

 

Hopkins didn't come close to beating him according to those at ringside. My viewing of the tape confirms this. The game he was playing required a bit more activity, a real punch and less of a vagina. And that was a depleted old-ass Calzaghe at that. To beat a prime Calzaghe, I think you need great power with sharp-shooter accuracy... a Julian Jackson type but maybe a bit bigger. Joe threw punches in bunches which means there were openings in bunches. A guy with the ultimate Persuader would could turn the tide quickly.

 

i've always had calzaghe winning but only but a point. it was ****ing tight

for calzaghe, i echo the statements of... (sorry i can't remember who) that said we'd know better if he fought more elite competition

based on his STYLE as an athletic, tough, accurate swarmer i'll say a pin point counter puncher with a high work rate, great right hand and ability to HOLD. hold that mother****er when he tries that flurry ****

 

joe and his people weren't going to let anyone beat him. they almost underestimated bhop but he wasn't active enough. i was at the fight and had it 116-113 for joe. horrid fight. this is kind of an irrelevant topic. joe wasn't going to take any challenges he couldn't handle.

 

Joe was not shot but definitely in steep decline in that fight. His reflexes and judgement of distance were not near what they had been. And "throw one punch and dive in head first" Bernard was not the cause of this. Still, Lederman and Steward both said it was an "easy fight to score." He really sealed the deal from round 8 onward. Before that it was a difficult encounter to estimate.

 

A really bomb slugger would be my guess. A ketchel, a prime G-man or Jackson, something like that.

 

The formula? Any prime HOF-calibre fighter would've exposed Calzaghe's glaring technical deficiencies. That's why he never fought any. A prime Hopkins or Jones would've outclassed him with ease, and made him look like not much more than a happyslapping amateur. I think even guys like Ward and Dirrell would have a field day with Calzaghe's wide-open sloppy defence. Anyone with good punching technique, decent movement and a nifty defence would give Calzaghe hell.

 

Do what BHOP did only more of it, save allowing him to dry hump you. Don't do that. Judges actually consider that a sign of defeat on the part of the guy on the bottom. You'll probably lose that way. Even if you smile the whole time.