Calzaghe Only Faced Bums In His WBO Title Reign? THE PROPER BREAKDOWN.

Only he could know when the right time was. I couldn't tell a prize fighter when he should or shouldn't quit(Nor do I think he would listen to the likes of me anyway ) He made his cash, forged a legacy(albeit a seriously flawed one)and had a lot of fans. I do however think he retired to protect that 0 as much as anything else.

 

Why is Hopkins considered a good win for Joe C while the UK fanatics completely dismiss Hops wins over Tito and DLH?

 

I don't know. It all works that way I guess. I also don't get the argument that Hopkins, having beaten up on smaller guys at mw and at lhw, is still somehow a great win.

He's a great win, for Calzaghe, even though he was 43 years old, but somehow he has no great wins of his own. How exactly does that work?


IMO Tito was the best win on either guy's resume.

 

Were it not for Hopkins Tito would have controlled the MW division for a long time. What he did to Joppy was shocking, and the bookies had their reason to make Tito a heavy favorite for the Hopkins fight.

Tito walked through Joppy, a legitamite MW contender at the time, in a way no one has been able to do since, and that includes Jermaine Taylor, Lucian Bute at SMW, and even Hopkins himself. Just watch that video of Tito Joppy and you will see what Tito was about at MW.

Although i think beating Tarver was better than the Tito fight. Tarver is the man who ended Jones, and was the king of the LHW at the time, and again, a heavy favorite.

 

ODL had no resume at MW. He had one fight that I scored a draw and most scored a loss.

He was a former 130 lb champ when they met and Bernard was a former 175 lber.


Tito, while great and exciting, never had a great victory after Bernard's crew brought his handwrapping technique to light. And his dad told us that was how Tito always wrapped his mitts previously.

And again, there was a size disparity with the former wwt.


Both were GOOD victories but neither one was great, IMO.

Hops' best wins were against Tarver and Pavlik.

And his best non-wins were against RJJ (1) and Pascal.



Calzaghe was fighting for the first time in the states, for the first time at 175 and took four rounds to adjust.



So his three American judge decision ( 9-3, 8-4, 6-6 ) over the very wiley (and somewhat dirty) legend was a great win.

Especially in light of BHop's subsequent performances against Pavlik and Pascal.

 

Hopkins best career weight win was against Trinidad a welterweight that had only one previous fight at Hopkins middleweight. Trinidad retired after one more fight he did make a comeback and fought 4 times in total after Hopkins, losing 2 of them.

 

Ottke was ranked ahead of Calzaghe, and would have given Calzaghe undisputed right of being the main man of the division, how do you think that is not a more bigger fight than Hopkins vs Sturm.

Hopkins faced Hakkar who was a mando, then faced a unification bout with Joppy, followed by another Mando Allen, then a unifcation bout with Oscar.

In doing so, is the greatest Middleweight champion of all time, surpassing legends like Monzon and Hagler.

A 43 year old Hopkins, who was more over the hill than his opponent a 35 Year old Calzaghe, schooled his opponent. For this reason Calzaghe didnt want a rematch. So what makes you think that a 37 Year old Hopkins would have lost to a 29 year old Calzaghe who had struggled with counter punchers before in Paul Mason and Robin Reid.

What do you think would have happened in 2002 between Calzaghe and Hopkins. Do you think the scorecards would have been closer or wider?

It cant be closer than an SD, BBC radio scoring it 6 rounds a piece, and that is against a 43 past his physical prime Hopkins, so a 37 year Old Hopkins who was still scoring Knockouts, coming off his greatest win would not have gassed like he did and most likely ****ed Calzaghe up.

Calzaghe gets slated because he never defended his LHW crown against a live opponent, RJJ was shot.

Hopkins is having tune ups, and making business with RJJ, but still is fighting live opponents. If Calzaghe did what Hopkins did there would be no problems.

You see the difference.

The following scenario didnt occur:-

Calzaghe vs RJJ, follwed by Calzaghe vs Dawson/Pascal/Cloud.

But this scenario did occur:-

Hopkins vs RJJ, followed by Hopkins vs Pascal.

Calzaghe was too shook to take the real scenario on. Hopkins did take the real scenario on.

Acting a ***** is declining to fight knowing there is no other better option.

Calzaghe declined a rematch and went to sniff coke, thats acting the *****.

Hopkins declined moving up in weight when he could stick around and get a better option unifying all 4 MW belts aswell as a big payday with Oscar De La Hoya.

And then once he done all of that, moved up and fought Calzaghe which nullifies all the accusations that he ducked Calzaghe.

Exactly, Calzaghe knew he was going to get beat sooner or later, so didnt want anything to do with

Calzaghe vs Hopkins II
Calzaghe vs Pavlik
Calzaghe vs Dawson
Calzaghe vs Froch

Not saying Calzaghe would have lost those above fights, I am saying those above fights were alot tougher than Calzaghe vs RJJ, which his career ended on, and Calzaghe knew that. Him getting knocked down by 2 fighters with the average age of 41 Years old, was a clear indication he aint on the level of BHop who is showing his ring intelligence still today.

 

Hopkins second best career weight win was against DLH, he was a career lightweight/welterweight that had only won one title at middleweight when he lost to Hopkins at middleweight.

 

Popkins your man Hopkins has lots of holes in his resume a lot of smoke and mirrors when you look beneath the surface then you already know that dont you, all the hype surrounding Hopkins being a legend yet when he faced Joe Calzaghe in his home country, Hopkins lost, he was on a winning streak before Calzaghe and has remained unbeaten after Calzaghe.

 

Which was the bigger fight to be made, Calzaghe vs Ottke or Hopkins vs Sturm?

1. Importance - Calzaghe vs Ottke was a far more important fight than Hopkins vs Sturm

With Calzaghe and Ottke, you had two undefeated SMW champions, who were ranked #1 and #2, some people ranked Ottke higher while others ranked Calzaghe higher. The winner of this bout would have be recognised as the main man in the division.

With Hopkins and Sturm, you had the main man in the division (Hopkins) and a fresh new champion Felix Sturm.

With regards to importance, Ottke vs Calzaghe was the far more historic, and required for the division than Hopkins vs Sturm.

1 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

2. Calzaghe and Ottke were champions at the same time for longer than Hopkins and Sturm

Calzaghe and Ottke were both champions from 1998 - 2003, that is

This content is protected

Compared to Hopkins - Sturm, who were champions at the same time from Sept 2003 - June 2004, thats

This content is protected

this.

5 years is alot longer than 9 months.

2 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

3. Opposition beaten

Calzaghe and Ottke had beaten opponents of roughly the same quality. Matter of fact, some may argue that Ottke beat better opposition while both were active.

Sturm hasnt beaten anyone on the level that Hopkins was beating.

3 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

4. Chances

Calzaghe vs Ottke at the time would still have been regarded as a 50/50 fight.

While Hopkins vs Sturm was and still probably will be regarded as a mismatch.

Here is what a common opponent David Starie said regarding a possible Calzaghe vs Ottke:-

"That's a very difficult question, almost impossible to answer, they are both intelligent boxers. I would go with Joe, but I wouldn't put money on it."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/2992148.stm

4 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

5. "Ottke would have ****ed up Calzaghe"

That is a more plausible statement than "Sturm would have ****ed up Hopkins"

5 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

6. Ottke and Calzaghe are similar

Both Ottke and Calzaghe are ranked around the same place when it comes down to All time Super Middleweight rankings. Sturm is not on the same level as Hopkins, matter of fact not even the top 10 when it comes to all time Middleweight rankings

6 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

7. Rivalry

Both Calzaghe and Ottke were, and are still considered rivals of one another.

Hopkins and Sturm have never been likened as rivals.

7 - 0 Calzaghe vs Hopkins

8. Interaction

It has been recorded that Calzaghe and Ottke met each other in Germany, and agreed to a fight. Hopkins and Sturm never agreed on a fight, and never had any negotiations.

8 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

9. Ottke had 2 belts, compared to Sturm who only had one

Ottke had the IBF and the WBA. Sturm only had the WBO

9 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

10. Ottke was more established at the weight than Sturm

Ottke had beaten, and defended his title more than Sturm

10 - 0 Calzaghe vs Ottke

:deal