Hopkins is the greatest fighter of this time!!!!

I don't mind having him behind Monzon or Robinson, but H2H he would knock out most of them, bar maybe LaMotta or something. He'd beat them all.

Hopkins on the other hand, I think would struggle with a few of them alright. His longevity and underdog wins make his legacy though.

 

And Brian Nielsen, is the best heavyweight ever;I)!

 

Calzaghe was very good. But a prime Roy Jones would have beat him...bad. Jones was much faster and much, much more powerful. Watch their highlght reels back to back. Calzaghe's is impressive, but he doesn't have many devasting knockouts. Not like Jones. When Jones was in his mid twenties, the guy was virtually unbeatable. No chance Calzaghe could have knocked a young James Toney down and beaten him every single round. Sorry, but this Calzaghe worship is gettng ridiculous. He was a very good fighter, but he never beat a great fighter in his prime. Jones did. :hey

 

You're a fool who sees a zero and thinks that means the guy is unbeatable. Grow up. Joe Calzaghe's resume is nowhere near good enough to justify placing him higher than Jones or Hopkins. He beat nobodies for a decade, beat the crazily overrated Lacy, had the single meaningful victory of his career over Kessler, then scraped past a well past-prime Hopkins in a fight many thought he lost, then slapped around the fossilized remains of Roy Jones. If you think that's a better career than Jones's (4 weight champ, long-time p4p#1, heavyweight belt holder, better resume) or Hopkins (unified mw title, defended unified title numerous times, had reign as p4p#1, strong resume, special achievements of wins at age 40+) then you should take up tennis.

 

He was, the pavlik victory was his most impressive performance.

 

greatest imho no. great defence,slick moves offensive not really. fun to watch? not even close. some of his 11 to 15 punches a round fight that were wins were dreadful to watch. the only guy to best him on those night was taylor. i must admit his fight against pavlic was a great performance though.

 

When I first seen Calzaghe fight I said to myself, that guy will never lose a fight and it wasn't because he was undefeated, it was because of his style. He's a special fighter that you don't see that often, especially coming from the UK ... he's aggressive, he's super fast, he can box great, he brawl, he can adjust at any point of the fight. He's also very slick.

The difference between he, jones and hopkins is that he will refuse to lose ... thats why those guys lose ... if Calzaghe had been in a situation like Jones was against Tarver or against Johnson he would've adjusted and won the fight - he would've realized his advantage and utilized it. The same goes for Hopkins ... against Taylor ... there's no way that Calzaghe would've waited until the championship rounds to turn up the heat ... he would've taken some risks along the way to seperate himself in the scoring from his opponent.

He's better than those two and i'm not afraid to admit it ... he's great ... I actually pick both guys to beat Calzaghe if that makes it any better.

At no point in their career would they have been able to beat Calzaghe ... he's too much of a fighter and he's a risk taker.

Thats why he beat those guys when they fought ... and don't make any excuses talking about they were old or they were shot because they're still fighting on a high level. You see during his fights with the two that what happen would've happened 10-15 yrs before. Those guys just weren't willing to take the risk in fighting him because he was from Europe.

Hopkins wanted to play cat and mouse ... so Calzaghe became aggressive (yeah he opened himself up but that was a risk he was willing to take) to get the decision.

He flat out dominated Roy ... and no matter what you guys think of Roy ... Roy was never that guy you thought he was ... yeah he was great but never the superior tacticion that he appeared to be in the past.

If Calzaghe didn't have respect for him, he would've knocked him out ... I got the fight on tape and you can see that towards the end of the fight Calzaghe was hestitant to get Jones out of there.

 

1. I am not even going to comment on Pavlik. Not until I see his next fight. Styles make fights sometimes.
2. I don't know about you, but to me, smash would be to KO someone in a brutal way.
3. Hopkins started pro boxing in 1988. That's 20 ****ing years ago!!!
4. 43 is 43 not matter at what age you started!!!!!!!!!!!!
5. P4P lists, they are all BS. Everybody has a different one. P4P is nothing but a "My favorite fighters list"

 

no..dont be silly

 

Hopkins is undoubtedly the greatest fighter of this time.

 

This post is complete bull because you cannot base a fighter's legacy on hypotheticals. Cal would have done this or that if this and if that. Thats not worth ****. Jones and Hops DID more then Cal, for longer then Cal, against better comp the Cal. Those are the facts. Not whats ifs.

 

Yes. And I think that as time goes on this will become more and more the consensus.

 

Who cares how old he was atsch
Calzaghe had brittle hands, yet adapted and outboxed an opponent that was prime because, he never relied on power or speed, it was tactics, clearly Hop was maxed out on this, and did his best possible performance against a shot calzaghe.

P4P is not BS, because people mentioned in it, are at the top of their game, maybe its peoples opinion on who is the very top, but fact is, on just about everyones Hop would be there today.

Hop at 43 is better than he was when he lost to RJJ.

I see why Hop ducked a younger less shot Calzaghe.