114-113 Hopkins, so says the Associated Press, ESPN.com and many ESBers.

Sorry Smokey - According to mastercalzaghe's criteria - You must be either black or american to have scored a draw.

 

Euro v USA doesn't concern me as I'm neither American nor European, just pointing to some of the implications of your statement (i.e. black Europeans would have a bias towards black American fighters whereas white Americans wouldn't have a bias towards white European fighters).

Obviously, logic is not your field of expertise.

 

Have you ever seen Enzo in the corner before??? If so, have you seen him act any different? I certainly haven't. With respect to Enzo saying that he has to knock Hopkins out, I think there are two reasons. Firstly, it's the last round and he needs to motivate Joe, enough said. Secondly, the fight is taking place in the US against an American fighter. I would expect Calzaghe to be up against it with 3 American judges and I am sure Enzo would think the same. To be fair tho, two of the judges done well.....the one that gave it to Hopkins, on the other hand, needs ****ing with a Christmas tree.

 

The busier, more active fighter won the fight due to his activity and dominance of the rounds few moments of activity.

I dont think the decision to award the fight to Calzaghe was strange, I find the arguments used against him winning are obscure though.

 

I haven't read all that thread. But the ESPN poll has zero credibility given the fact that 27.25% of the people don't understand boxing and gave Calzaghe the first.

Personally I scored it 114-113 Calzaghe

 

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59819

Here's a thread full of Calzaghe fans who also say Nard's low punch output cost him the fight.

 

5live, bbc sport & the Guardian didn't. atsch

 

The nazi fool Muttley lost a bet and subsequently banned himself:rofl:rofl

 

Same with the German television channel that broadcasted the fight. It was a close fight, just because you happened to think it swung Bernard's way doesn't make you a biased individual. It was hard to score too and people here from both camps have said they think the other fighter won it. I think Joe did enough but **** anyone who says that he blew Bernard out of the water... they're just overcompensating for the fact that Joe looked like slappy **** and was knocked on his ass in the first round by a 43 year old fighter

 

BBC didn't. What other sites does that leave?

 

im a calzaghe fan and i felt, on the night, that taking into account the knockdown, hopkins won by one round......id like to watch it again to see if my instincts are right, but hey, im no boxing judge and i thought he nicked it by one round, so the decision going to joe was hardly a robbery...(id have had it even if bhop hadnt scored the knockdown..)....

..i do think many people dont see the differecne between aggression and EFFECTIVE aggression..sure calzaghe was the aggressor, but it wasnt effective...hopkins landed less punches but much more clean, effective punches.....im glad joe got the decision, and my respect for hopkins has diminished somewhat after his low blow claiming writhings....it was an enthralling fight ratehr than an exciting one......

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Exactly.

 

I'd like to see the scorecards of the 27.25% who gave the first round to Joe C!

 

:| :| :| :| :| :| :| :|

 

I thought BHop won 114-113 but I can't cry robbery, it was a very hard fight to score, I liked BHop's work better though. He was the only one landing clean throughout.