Calzaghe vs Ward break down of strengths? Very even across board

and ...

 

I just have, you are just proving your ******edness HerolGump.....inbreeding I blame.

 

and...

and let me know one day what on joes LHW resume is better than 2 elite wins, cheers.

or shakespeare version

one day forsooth let thee speak of joes lhw resume, what one win perchance is greater than 2 elite wins

 

I already have....

You must have a really crap life to constantly do this all day everyday.....but I'll play ball.

It's like I'm helping the mentally challenged.

Hopkins win > Kovalev win

 

Philosophy Paper A

Question 1a. Let us consider, in what parallel universe can the number 1 be considered greater than the number 2.

for instance, can 1 world class win be considered greater than 2 elite level wins. Discuss (20marks)

 

Was he anywhere near his prime? Would he ever go on to score another KO? Did Joe dominate him and batter him or merely score a nip and tuck split decision?

None of the facts you cite give any context to the victory. There's no way whatsoever that a 44 year old Hopkins was a better victory than a prime, undefeated Kovalev. A prime Hopkins, yes, but not the version Joe fought.

I look forward to more of your facts without context. I can't wait to see "Frazier's best win was Ali and Ali lost to Berbick, so (insert white fighter's name here) is clearly better than Frazier."

 

Because Ward got a gift the 1st time round.....and he needed 3 "tune ups" prior to jumping in with a guy who's best win is a 49yo Hopkins....LMFAO.

HOPKINS KOVALEV

P4P top 3 check nope
Lineal check nope
Number 1 check maybe
ATG/HOF check not yet

 

and 2>1

 

i wonder when you will realise that you are using the claim that hopkins was duff(er) as proof that kovalev is duff(er) (cos u think its his best win) and then using that to prove hopkins wasnt a duff(er) win calzaghe.


u are saying hopkins was duff to prove hopkins wasnt duff! hahaha!

funnyman, i think you are trying to make me laugh still, u cant seriously not see the above.

 

Hopkins had only scored 4 stoppages in the 8 years prior to facing Calzaghe, so why would you be bothered about him not stopping anyone after Joe?

After he lost to Joe he beat the following fighters

Pavlik
RJJ
Pascal (Kovalevs 2nd best win)
Cloud
Shumenov
Murat

Not exactly work of a shot fighter is it?

Again but Kovalev is a monster because he beat Hopkins, Yet Joe is Gatti level. GTFOOH.

 

Hopkins was still elite when JC beat him.

He was duff when Kovalev beat him.

Not sinking in though is it Gump?

 

Reading comprehension and context just aren't your suit are they? Read my Gatti comment again.

In your opinion, a 44 year old with no power is a better win than a prime guy rated #3 P4P with huge power. That tells me all I need to know.

The fact you keep rating a shell of RJJ just backs it up.

 

Yes, Bernard did go undefeated for 4 years after he fought Joe. But apart from his age, (which he deserves huge respect for) there was nothing really too challenging regarding those opponents that he faced.

Yes, even at 43 he was still a highly ranked P4P fighter. But he'd always had trouble with guys who possessed good speed and movement, and even though he was still in great shape at that age, he wasn't fit enough to fight at Joe's pace at that stage of his career.

Regarding Kovalev, you can't just say that he blew the rematch. Again, Andre broke him down. Before the first fight most people said that Kovalev would blow him out. Then afterwards, Kovalev told the boxing world that Andre had zero power, he hit like a woman, and that he was going to make a huge statement in the rematch. He said that he was going to train like a demon and Andre was going to be destroyed. Yet we saw what happened. And now he'll never be the same, because his aura of invincibility has been shattered.

Now it's okay to compare Bernard and Kovalev as fighters. Of course, I understand why you've done that. But you simply also have to look from the perspectives of both Joe and Andre, and analyse the type of challenge that they were both faced with. And as of yet, you most definitely haven't done that.

Looking at things from Joe's perspective:

He was fighting a crafty and cunning veteran who possessed a high skill set. But also, one who was of an advanced age, who wasn't as fit as what he was, who was nowhere near as fast as what he was, and who wasn't regarded as a big puncher.

Looking at things from Andre's perspective:

He was facing a prime LHW who also possessed good skills, but one who was stronger than he was, and who was a much bigger puncher than he was, considered by many to be a very dangerous fighter.

In my opinion, Kovalev presented Andre with a tougher challenge than what Bernard presented to Joe.

In my opinion, the manner of victory also has to be taken account. Again, Joe beat Bernard on workrate, whilst Andre broke Kovalev down both physically and mentally. To me, a light punching LHW scoring a stoppage win over a prime, big punching LHW, trumps a close decision win over a slower, older LHW.

All things considered, Andre owns the better win.

 

I've not rated the RJJ victory at all but I'd say it was on par with Barrerra who has failed every time he stepped up, Bivol did a much better job on him than Ward did.

Also that guy with power outboxed Ward in their first fight and Hopkins was the legit champion when Calzaghe beat him.

Wards run at 175 is nothing special, Smith jr and Brand are awful, Barrerra is C level at best and Kovalev is a very solid win although imo not as good as JC over Hopkins at the time of the fight.

 

Bottom line: would you favor the 44 year old Hopkins Joe faced to beat the version of Kovalev that Ward faced?