I watched the fight objectively and I had Calzaghe winning a close decision. I would not have objected if it had been a draw or a Hopkins win because it was a very close ugly fight but even so I personally think Calzaghe did enough to win. That said, I think Hopkins play acting in the 11th round swung the fight in Calzaghe's favor with the judges more than his pre-fight comments.
Calzaghe easily beat him. If Hopkins hadn't cheated his way to many rests he would have been stopped,simple as. If he was so good why did he keep cheating? Because Calzaghe was outclassing him. Get real.
Of course it raises Calzages stock when Hopkins continues to win titles years after he beat him. Hopkins schooling undefeated Pavlick a few months after, then beating Cloud and Pascal years later show how he was/still a world level operator. If he had lost these fights, of course Calzage's win would mean less. What's perhaps most impressive about the performance is how Calzage didn't allow Hopkins to impose his will and control the fight like he usually does so well. Calzage is hater by many on here and overrated by some but he was a good champion and Hopkins was a good win for him.
Those type of antics should have no more barring on the results than Joe's gay humping. Bhop lost the fight before he stepped in the ring. Joe never fought him again (even though Bhop said he would go to England) because he knew he lost the first fight. I imagine that a rematch would have made 2x the money of the first fight in the UK
I agree Joe slapped near the end of his career,but that was due to his hands being ****ed up-if his hands had been ok he would have smashed Hopkins. What an achievement-46-0 by slapping.ATG.:happy
Calzaghe would have done better if Cortez hadn't allowed Hopkins to foul his way through the fight. To me Calzaghe won despite one of the most biased refereeing performances you're ever likely to see.