Hopkins would have beaten Calzaghe decisively in a rematch. Yes/No?

You're obviously not as intelligent as I thought. Now you're resorting to false predications to support your flimsy arguments. First, Ben Dirs is the main writer for BBC Sports (under BBC News) for boxing coverage who is always at ringside for major fights, including Hopkins-Calzaghe. "BBC News" wouldn't be different than "BBC Sports", because they're one and the same. As for radio, you probably listened in on redistributed broadcast from an independent telecast (which is often done on BBC Radio). So let me refresh you again, the BBC officially scored Hopkins-Calzaghe for Hopkins. The man's name is Ben Dirs, look it up. Or. how about this...why don't you NAME these "official BBC" telecasters. You can't, because you pulled it out of your ass.

And by the way, your statement about "BBC" being "English" shows you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about. BBC = BRITISH BROADCASTING COMPANY. It's own mission statement states its main purpose is to provide a public broadcasting system for all of the United Kingdom. It has offices all over the UK, just because its CORPORATE headquarters is in London doesn't mean its "English" :roll:


And you might wanna check your facts, although it seems you're now making up facts hoping no one would see through them. The AP and ESPN scored the fight for Calzaghe....oh really?

"Judge Ted Gimza scored it 115-112 for Calzaghe, and Chuck Giampa favored Calzaghe 116-111. Judge Adalaide Byrd gave it 114-113 to Hopkins, as did many reporters at ringside -- including The Associated Press, which also favored Hopkins 114-113 despite Calzaghe's dominance in the final five rounds.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=3355206

"ESPN.com also had it 114-113 for Hopkins, but by the end of the fight, it was Calzaghe taking it to the 43-year-old. "
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/columns/story?columnist=rafael_dan&id=3355228


Show me where the NY Times scored the fight for Calzaghe (this should be fun, since the NY Times does not have a dedicated boxing writer and simply redistributes Associated Press articles).

No wonder Calzaghe fans are delusional. They like to rewrite history :roll:

Maxboxing? A boxing forum website? If you want to reference Lederman, then you damn better stick by his other scorecards as well. By the way, Mike Tyson is one of the most knowledgeable boxing historians out there, and here's who he thought won the fight:

Former heavyweight champion Mike Tyson, told MaxBoxing/***********.com's Javier Molina that he saw Hopkins winning the fight, but is not upset with the decision going the other way.

"It was a good fight. I thought Bernard won though. But, I'm happy that Calzaghe won this. It was a good fight," Tyson said.

 

Hey idiot, that's a reprinted Associated Press article in that NY Times link, exactly as I said. In fact, it's the exact same associated press article in the first link I posted .

Let me spell it out for you, from your NY Times link:


Calzaghe Rallies vs. Hopkins

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: April 20, 2008

"....Judge Ted Gimza scored it 115-112 for Calzaghe, and Chuck Giampa favored Calzaghe, 116-111. Judge Adelaide Byrd had it, 114-113, for Hopkins, as did many reporters at ringside...."