$500 bet for any Calzaghe fan in here

The rules of all the major bodies are all online.... please give us the link to "champ gets the benefit of the doubt" rule and we will all shut the **** up and you will have the biggest e-peen in the whole of ESB history.

Alternatively you will just be the biggest ***** in ESB history. How about a $500 bet that you cant find that rule and that you are making a dick of yourself?

 

How convenient it is that your scorecard fails to give Hopkins credit for the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th rounds. Rounds that Kevin Iole, Bert Sugar, Dan Rafael, Steve Kim, and the Associated Press, as well as many other writers and members of the media gave to Hopkins. You could not give Hopkins the benefit of the doubt in any of those rounds, despite the fact that Calzaghe was doing almost no clean work whatsoever. That's some ****ing objectivity you've got.. Again, nice Calzaghe avatar.

 

Thanks, i was thinking the same thing.

 

Listen to the "objectivity."

 

This guy is piece of ****. ^ Calling people all sorts of names, and this guy was being generally respectful to you. LiamE = ****ing ****.

 

I fail to give Hopkins credit for them rounds for one reason. That reason is he did absolutly nothing to warrant me to even consider giving him them rounds.

Who cares what other people seen? Im going off what i seen, which is exactly what you told somebody else to do earlier in the thread.

I give Hopkins rounds 1,2,3,4 and 10. I had Hopkins up 5 points after 4 rounds, you telling me a bias Calzaghe fan would have scored it that way?

After that Hopkins main weapon was took away. Calzaghe figured him out, applied pressure and Hopkins was unable to do what won him a sweep from 1-4, its as simple as that.

5-9 Calzaghe, 10 to Hopkins, 11-12 Calzaghe. Calzaghe wins by a point.

 

Larry Merchant? Do you listen to the things he says ??? The guy seems like he is drunk most of the time...although I find him entertaining and he always asks the tough questions he isn't the law on the rules of boxing.

 

This argument you and San Rafael are coming up with is weak.

If Hopkins could of done more, then why didn't he do it?

 

Im a hell of a lot more objective when it comes to Calzaghe than you can ever be when it comes down to Hopkins.

Point out my bias. Thanks.

 

Nope, what I told someone else earlier in the thread was that "making someone look like a fool" is subjective. There's nothing about scoring punches that is subjective. That is why virtually every so called expert gave Hopkins one or more of those rounds. Your card is not horrible though, just slightly biased. You have indicated that very clearly.

 

:rofl :yep :yep

Quit crying you ****ing baby. Did the nasty man on the interwebs be nasty to little San Rimofail? Awwww diddums.

 

Yeah... Official judges are right up there with punchstats. Offical judges. :roll: Good one.