Calzaghe nuthugger refuses to face the truth

Is this new to american boxing, the judges favouring the aggressive fighter?
As I remember it judges the world over will slightly favour a more active fighter as it seems they are trying to win the round, they have done more work. Now how everyone scores a fight is different hence three judges some like workrate/flurries, some favour cleaner shots as scoring points.
In between you have to make a choice between is one clean punch better than a scoring flurry and so on?
A mix of the two would usually show a clear round winner but a fight like JC BH can be tough to judge some rounds due to their output and quality of output.

However lets say it is a problem with american judges, they credit agression.
Hopkins is up 2 points after round 1, by the fourth you can argue the rounds to either fighter. At what point does hopkins think I am in the lead and I am doing enough? From rounds 4 onwards I score for Calzaghe the Majority, why is Hopkins not thinking, his output must be impressing the judges I need to step it up and get busier? Has Hopkins never fought in vegas before? Is it a big secret how the judges will score rounds?

Its more likely that JC has adapted his gameplan and come out on top, being the busier of the two fighters winning the majority of the fight from there on in and making hopkins fight at a pace that is too much for him.

Is it that hard to score the fight to calzaghe?

 

Roy fights in spurts. And if he does 'slap' it has a lot more power behind it compared to Calz.

 

I can answer for the entire forum... ehh, make that the entire universe...


NO

115-112 Calzaghe.

Period.

End of story.

:hi:

 

Most of these guys saw it the same way you did.

http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Default.asp

http://www.acb.org/

 

:yep :good

 

:d

 

Castillo-Mayweather was a tough fight to score. Castillo's coming
forward constantly, harder punches and forcing the exchanges vs. Floyd's defensive skills and quicker flurries and counterpunches. I had Castillo
up by one round but it's very debatable. Hopkins-Calzaghe was very
easy to score. Hopkins up by 1 point after four rounds. Joe's right
jab starts to land and he forces Hopkins to give ground and fight off
the ropes. Joe ups his workrate, shortens up his left hooks and begins
forcing Hopkins into the corners. Joe has control of the middle of the ring
and begins to even dominate the clinches. An exhausted Bernard
starts to fake lowblows and gets a rest period. He comes back strong
for a little but Joe is just too strong and fit and finishes the fight
with Hopkins cowering in the corner trying to parry Joe's flurries.
In the end Hopkins looks sad, slow and old. 116-111 to Joe and Hopkins
should have lost points for using his third arm, his head throughout
the fight.

 

I really find it hard to see how anyone could give Joe more then 1 of the first 4 or 5 rounds. At the same time its hard for me to see how anyone gave Hopkins more then 2 of the final 6 or 7 rounds. To me it was clear that hopkins won the first part and Calzaghe won the second part.

 

Did you people see the same fight as I did? I could agree with having BHop 5 points ahead in the first 4 rounds, but he didn't do **** to win any of the other rounds. How are you going to win a fight with throwing a single punch, lunging forward, and grabbing?! EVERYTIME! How are you going to win like that when your opponent is COMING FORWARD, throwing a ton of punches (I don't give a **** if there slaps, punches, etc they still land the same)!
115-112 was a good score IMO for Calzaghe. I'd even give you guys the benefit of the doubt if you said you scored, and it was a DRAW. Those of you who had BHOP ahead by like 3 points is laughable. I mean just take a look at the damn punchstats for further proof. How are you going to be 3 points ahead when the other guy was the aggressor, threw way more punches, landed way more punches, etc? YOU AREN'T, and that's why Hopkins lost. End of story.
Also, the only reason this is a big deal is because this fight was made to be racial...Can't say Hopkins helped that out much. The **** he said in the beginning was bad enough "I'll never lose to a white boy." Kind of pushing it, but it makes for an interesting fight. Giving Joe calzaghe NO CREDIT though whenever Joe was nice enough to give him credit is utter trash. Bhop is a legend...A trashy one though who crosses the line, and usually in the ring doesn't care how he has to win a fight.

 

Joe forced the pace, came forward and threw more punches in the
first five rounds than did Hopkins. Those first 4 rounds were very
even and Hopkins fought very dirty but I had Hopkins ahead after
4 rounds by 1 point due to the KD. After that the middle of the
ring belonged to Joe once his jab started driving Bernard back. It
is an easy fight to score. You give guys rounds for being the
aggressor not just because their forcing the action but because
they are taking all the risks to get a fight going. Otherwise, you
have two dudes posing and dancing around the ring. Dancing
with the stars would be more fun to watch. At least there you've
got a cute chick to ogle at.

 

Hopkins won the first 4 rounds in the fight I watched.

 

Joe broke Hopkins will by the 10th round and had him faking lowblows
to keep from being manhandled and overwhelmed along the ropes
the same as Manfredo was. At least Manfredo took his beating like
a man and didn't look to the ref to save him. Hopkins will forever be
remembered as that guy who would rather cheat to survive than
fight back like a man even though it meant losing to the better fighter.
Joe did what he had to do. He came to America, he saw and he
conquered.

 

you had hoppy up five after 4 cause your intellectually limited.. :rofl

 

This was a fight that was close and could be scored either way. I had it a draw but niether fighter impressed me. Hopkins did well for a 43 yo though I guess.

 

You folk who are saying Calzaghe lost are really digging a deeper grave.

The result is not even debatable to anyone who knows how to score a fight.

Please stop embarrassing yourselves.