Would you watch the fight again . . . And pretend you don't know either of the fighters . . . And when you see joe winging arm punches that don't even land, will you please acknowledge the fact that he was ineffective for 80% of the fight?
Sometimes we see a fight that is difficult to score because both combatants did so well. Calzaghe/BHop was difficult to score because they both SUCKED!!
Since he throws punches in that manner in almost every single fight, do you believe everyone that's ever had the pleasure of officiating a Calzaghe fight has been paid off or doesn't know the rules as well as you do? Hopkins deliberately spoils in every fight...it's swings and roundabouts, son.
ive had some discussions with a few on this board about this fight as i scored for hopkins...watched it last night again ...here's my scorecard 1) Hopkins 10-8 2) hopkins 10-9 3) hopkins 10-9 4) hopkins 10-9 5) calzaghe 10-9 6) hopkins 10-9 7) hopkins 10-9 8) calzaghe 10-9 9) calzaghe 10-9 10) hopkins 10-9 11) calzaghe 10-9 12) calzaghe 10-9 115-112 BH I originally had it 114-113 hopkins but ive watched it a fair few times since and have become less and less impressed with calzaghes work its so sloppy. I actually found hopkins work far more noticeable and joe was at times amateurish.
Hopkins was talking **** right after the fight ended. Now Calzaghe speaks out in response and it's some kid of a big deal?
offer me your scorecard?? whats so shocking anyway...adelaide byrd had it 114-113 115-112 is just a one round difference and there were a few swing rounds so its within realms of possibility
Landing 100+ more punches and at a higher connect rate is pretty effective by my standards, but that's just me