calzaghe vs hopkins

for me hopkins is better,calzaghes style just ruins any fight for me

 

The thing which also give bhop a slight edge is his longetivity, even though calzaghe ain't no spring chicken himself

 

American fighters always rate higher than British.

Case and point, Lennox vs Holyfield.

 

People let their personal feelings affect this judgement.

 

Pretty even in all honesty. People harp on about all the awesome people BHop fought, but theres some proper ****ing donkeys on his record. They had really very comparable careers to be fair.

 

Name Hopkins' top 3 wins, and name Calzaghe's top 3 wins.....

End of thread

 

Calzaghe - Hopkins, Eubank, Kessler

Hopkins - Trinidad, Pavlik, Tarver.

Kessler>Pavlik. Hopkins>Trinidad, Tarver>Eubank.

I'd say they were pretty equal.

 

Your broader claim aside, the specific example of Lennox and Holyfield was a poor one imo. Lennox's H2H prowess cannot be denied, but in terms of ATG standing, in accounting for resume and accomplishments, I cannot see how he would possibly surpass Holyfield.

On a side note, I am unsure of what to think regarding Calzaghe.

 

You honestly regard Hopkins and Eubank as Joe's greatest wins?

A gift decision against a 43 year old Hopkins, and weight drained past prime Eubank? Wow, that honestly says alot about his career then :-(

 

Don't see it as a gift at all and it is beyond me how anyone can score that fight to B-hop. All his antics to get a breather made it asll the worse.

Eubank for 31 and in training for another fight at the time. However the other fighter was orthadox so his prep wasn't ideal. Was it the best Eubank ever? No! But he was still dangerous and a decent win to have on your record.

Were these his best two wins? For me no!

I would say Lacy and Kessler.

 

I would agree with you, and regard Lacy and Kessler as his best wins too. Now for supposedly being the greatest British fighter ever, that's pretty dismal to say the least, especially when you look at how they've been exposed since. This to me suggests two things:

1. His tag as the greatest British fighter ever, is totally unwarranted
2. The talent pool of our British fighters is **** poor compared to the Americans and Mexicans.

The 1st point is definately correct, whilst the 2nd even has some truth to an extent

 

I don't agree with 'how they were exposed' afterwards.

The fighters were who they were on the day Joe fought them. Lacy was a force before running into Joe and his handlers should bear resposibility for not stopping the fight as it has ruined his career. Of course you can say that Kessler was never really that good but I wouldn't.

It's the usual story of everyone talking up the fighters prior to Joe beating them and then once he beats them they were hype jobs!

Ray Leonard rates Joe and thats good enough for me.

 

Me too.

It was a pretty crap article and didn't even mention that Hopkins had NO high profile fights outside the USA, while Calzaghe had two, both of which he won

 

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=225250&highlight=calzaghe+hopkins







.......this thread recently covered the same ground.