Calzaghe: The End

The idea that Joe's place in boxing history hinges on whether or not he fights Kelly Pavlik is a bit silly. Pavlik is going to ****ING SPARK BHop on October 18th, and Slappy Joe will never fight him.

 

Even when the second is true he still would be one of the elite fighters of his generation, not Top10 though. He has some solid wins over a number of (former) belt-holders and good contenders and he was dominant at this weight. What hurts him the most was that there was a unified champion at his weight during his reign which he didn´t fight and beat. It wasn´t alone his fault, regardless what his believers said both managers didn´t want the fight, but in the end that doesn´t matter. What matters is that they didn´t fight.
A great fighter, I had fun to watch him but what always annoyed me about him is him not fullfilling his potential.

 

EubanWoodhall were both retied at the time and came out to face Joe.

The rest re poor quality anyway.


Viet not once but twice.

 

Right tell me please how hopkins won the fight ????? here are the punch stats


Hopkins total punches 127/468 27 % jabs 11/93 12% power punches 116/375 31 %

calzaghe total punches 232/707 33 % jabs 45/224 20% power punches 187/483 39%

Joe landed more in every round and had better success :yep

Clearly a win for joe unless you are blind or stupid mother ****er consumed with hatred Calzaghe was a clear winner :deal

 

Punch stats never tell the whole story of a fight. If you would know boxing you would know that. There isn´t more to say to your stupid post.

 

If you knew boxing, you'd realise a knock down never tells the whole story of a fight either.

If you knew boxing, you would have no doubt who won the Calzaghe vs Hopkins fight.

Tip, it isn't Hopkins

 

In the books not, there you´re right. In my book it is Hopkins. He made Calzaghe fight his fight, showed better defense and landed the harder shots but faded as the fight went on. I had it 6-6 in rounds and with the kd Hopkins won. He proved that he knoww how to beat Joe and if he would have been younger he wouldn´t have faded and beat Calzaghe more clearly.

But well you can believe in statistics and pretend you know what you´re talking about, i still think Chrurchill was right about them.

 

Your book is obviously one that ignores all judging criteria for a fight.

Effective Aggression, Punches Landed, Ring Control.

Hopkins did that for two or three rounds.

Calzaghe did it for the rest.

You can think what you like, the fact is, no one cares what you think, you've exposed yourself as a guy who can't think objectively.

 

i suggest you go rewatch the fight and learn how to score, as hugging and spoiling and landing less and trowing less leather doesen't win a fight period :rofl

 

Well, perhaps you should learn to make an argument before trying to discuss with me.

 

Well, that´s not right entirely. Calzaghe did it for 6 rounds as did B-Hop. We could argue over this for years and nobody would change his mind.

dito.

 

compubox stats only count in hopkins fights when it shows that he outlanded his opponent.

reference - hopkins fans behaviour after hopkins-taylor I & II.

 

Calzaghe won 8 or so rounds on my card, and this was with a ref that let Hops do whatever he felt like in there. The fight itself was so ugly my family deleted it after I'd watched it twice because they said I needed to quit being so hard on myself.