Calzaghe in shock new revelations

dont know about make up troghed onto her mutt, i know what i would put in it :hey

 

He looks like some 15 year old kid on his first night out

 

Good on him, he's enjoying hinself after years of hard work, why not?

 

add this to his hopkins 'win' being discredited by appearing shot after all, and another bad week for the pride of wales.
if froch beats kessler the authorities will need to add joe to the suicide watch.

 

Hopkins career best win came after Calzaghe.

 

you can't seriously believe that?

pavlik isn't in the same breath as some of his previous wins, especially not at a weight he wasnt used to. i don't think its a coincidence that hopkins looked past it in the fight before pavlik, and the fight after pavlik. it figures that pavlik just wasn't much of a test as he was so linear.

following the hopkins jones fight, it just occurred to me that all of calzaghes headline fights have been totally discredited now, and leave his 'legacy' in an absolute shambles so to speak.

impartially speaking of course :yep

 

So have Muhammad Alis. Liston lost to Leotis Martin, Foreman lost to Holyfield and Frazier could only scrape a very lucky draw against Jumbo Cummings.

Hopkins-Jones II has zero impact on Calzaghes "legacy".

 

with respect i think you're wrong. we've covered this before - and general consensus is it is mad to not judge a fighter's performances around the time of the bout in question. when hopkins beat pavlik people said it enhanced calzaghes win over him because b-hop definitely was still a force, so why doesnt a morbid showing next up have an impact?

 

Who is a better win than Pavlik?

Oscar, Trinidad? These guys are like fat pygmy's at middleweight compared to normal human beings. At least Pavlik is a decent size for a human being.

These fights were just comical and farcical.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RL2plwvcGAQ[/ame]

Hopkins in the old days struggled with Howard Eastman and didn't do enough to beat Jermain Taylor. Post-Calzaghe he was good enough to be the man who twice defeated Taylor. Hopkins prime was when he fought Joe Calzaghe, it is as simple as that.

 

Pavlik showed that Hopkins was not shot. Thats all. It didn't show he was close to his prime or still a major force at 175.

Calzaghe beat Hopkins (and he did beat him) because Hopkins could no longer cope with boxers who have a good workrate. He didn't beat him because Hopkins was shot or because he was clearly the better fighter all along (I guess thats for another thread).

But to wait a number of years (the Kessler fight was over 2 years ago, Hopkins pretty much 2 years ago) until the inevitable happens and all a fighters big wins have either been defeated or have put in sub-par performances is a very harsh way to judge a career.

 

:huh he was in his prime at 43 ,

 

Yes, judging on his performances against Mercado, Eastman and Taylor his prime came far later.

Maybe he aged differently or it could just be he was a cruiserweight draing to middleweight until he moved up?

Either way he improved.

 

To be honest I am playing a bit of devil's advocate with my opinion, but i think it would be hard to argue that hopkins' prime was when he fought joe - having previously unified the middleweight division, at the age of what, 43 or something, and being in the physical condition where he was only able to throw about 4 punches per round. that is not a man in his prime. hopkins punches were much more effective than joes, that is indisputable, and if he was younger he would have been able to throw more and do enough to get the rounds in the bag.

 

Hopkins aged very well used his skills to remain at the top until a relatively advanced age but thats different from him being in his prime.