Calzaghe vs Hopkins who faced the tougher Opposition Fight by Fight.

it's close overall i think hopkins fought the better fighters but calzaghe overall was the better fighter

 

I'd like to point out that all of Hopkins's fights there were actually world title fights while Calzaghe only had three.

 

Calzaghe LOL Hopkins fought blown-up MWs most of his career.

 

Changed it to how I see it.
Reasons -
1. When Calzaghe fought Sheika, Omar was rated and favoured by some people to win. Sheika had just beaten G Johnson at the time.
2. At the time when Calzaghe and Hopkins beat Starie and Johnson respectively. Johnson hadnt fought anyone of note and Starie had come back from a loss to beat undefeated future IBF LHW champ C Woods and M Baker. Obviously Johnson went on to do more but also lost many, many more at a low level, before doing so.
3. Mario Veit well ahead of Allen. Consider Veit was also world rated, but only ever lost to world champs or future world champs, and went on to gain victories over world rated Brewer, future title challenger Perdermo, Lock and current WBO LHW champ Braehmer
4. Felt Brewer and Echoles were of a similar level at the time even though Echoles owned a win over Brewer, Brewer had put Echoles down 3 times and they seemed even in level
5. Think Vanderpool for Hopkins should be above Jimenez in level
6. Think B Mitchell the 2 time WBA SMW champ who hadnt ever lost clearly at the time, was a better win than 2 time WBC MW champ Holmes who had lost clearly before
7. M Veit above Hakkar, see point 3.
8. De La Hoya was a great, great fighter, but not a great MW, only having had one fight at the weight (a disputed victory over Sturm), and never fought as high again after. I dont think Oscar would have beaten MWs like Echoles or Eastman. So I think Bika is a better victory, even though he dosent carry the name.

Thats how I came to 11 - 7 for Calzaghe

 

I would have:
Kessler-Tito
Eubank-Oscar
Mitchell-Holmes
Sheika-Johnson
Brewer-Joppy
Lacy-Echols

Pretty much the same if you ask me. Hopkins did fight the better opponents overall, but he lost to the top guys he fought: Jones, Taylor*2

 

Yea but oscar didn't come in great shape for that Sturm fight, you can clearly see a big difference in the hopkins fight. And you wanna look at better fighters, focus more on the skill level, instead of the size, which doesn't mean anything your not world class. Roy Jones wasn't no natural heavyweight but he still beat John Ruiz easy because Ruiz isn't that good.

 

He loss c ontroversial decisions to Taylor twice. I had him winning both fights.

 

Nard winning both fights? LOL.

 

Yup. And manny people thought that as well. Me and you just don't see the same things.

 

Many people? LOL, can't you even think for yourself?

 

Yup, that's why I had him winning both fights. He definetly don't believe Taylor beat him, you hear it in all his interviews and he even goes on by saying he ruined Jermain Taylor. He also proved he was better when he whooped winky and pavlik, 2 fighters who kicked Taylor's ass.

 

the robert allen trilogy just shades it for hopkins imo

 

If we stop with both guys after their own meeting with each other, Calzaghe has an overall better resume. The competition was very similar and Calzaghe had no losses compared with four for Bernard.

(IMO, Calzaghe would also have lost to Jones but he would have beaten Taylor without much digfficulty. Twice).

The best win there for Hopkins was Tarver, and Calzaghe's win over Hopkins negates that.

If Hopkins beats Pascal, depending on how, this, combined with his Pavlik win might clinch it for him in terms of greatness.

H2H, I think Calzaghe would always have an edge.

 

Fight By Fight is a load of shite anyway, since when did that come to have any meaning??? Hopkins has fought and beaten a clearly higher standard of competition throughout his career than Calzaghe has, no question about it. That's why he'll be remembered as by far the greater fighter.