Calzaghe would definitely have stopped Hopkins with a competent referee

Well, you had me fooled. I thought you were better than that.:roll:

 

I havent said Joe would score a stoppage but have said it would be possible with a ref that didnt allow holding (like Cortez when he reffed Hatton/Mayweather), instead we had Cortez allowing holding :huh.
My RBR scorecard has been posted before and I also noted recently that I watched he fight again giving rounds to Hopkins that were close that I felt Calzaghe won and still scored Joe a winner but only by a point when doing that. Truth is I felt he was a clear winner

 

I have watched Pavlik-Lopez and it was a fight where rounds can be close but not an overall score if that makes sense. Pavlik was clearly ahead even though some rounds were close for Pavlik and at the end Pavlik had Lopez hurt to seal the deal. Once again funny how 2 judges were in agreement.
As for your home fight comment

Calzaghe beat Hopkins in America with 3 American judges and Cortez as ref, do you think a fair judge would have allowed that holding?

 

Its often the way. They cant debate a subject against me without being schooled so they resort to name calling and joke threads or if they are really lost call me a troll and report me to mods, but if this post is so wrong they would have a sensible answer to it


Fact is they hate this post, and its a good bump post

Yes they all want to avoid this post because it has solid facts that cannot be debated against.
I will keep presenting that post as it reminds people of the true facts

This content is protected

. I understand that Hopkins is an American legend that people want to see as an iconic figure. America love a reformist and Hopkins as a former armed robber turned world champ is just the story that wins Americas hearts but...

This content is protected

1. Calzaghe landed more than 100 punches than Hopkins throughout the fight.
2. Contrary to what people want to believe, Calzaghe also made Hopkins miss more
3. All round punch percentages, Calzaghe finished ahead of Hopkins
4. Calzaghe outlanded Hopkins in every round
5. A Byrd who scored for Hopkins it appears has a history for bad scorecards. Type in Adalaide Byrd in Google and see what comes up for yourself, still here are some little things for you to look at
a. A Byrd was the only judge out of the 3 scoring judges that had Mack ahead against Cloud
b. The K Pavlik - A Lopez fight was scored 98-92, 99-91 by the other 2 judges, A Byrd scored it 95-95
c. A Byrd was one of the judges that had Morales a 4 point loser against Maidana
d. In the S Aydin vs S Ouali fight, the other 2 judges scored clearly for Aydin. Byrd scored for Ouali
e. The J Almaraz/C Tyler fight was scored a Maj-Dec all because of one judge, guess which? A Byrd
f. The A DeMarco/J Reyes fight was a SD. Guess who the odd judge out was? A Byrd.
g. The R Torres - M Arnaoutis fight was a close fight, a point either way to 2 judges but a wide result scored by Byrd
h. In the A Pryor Jr/D Stanislavjevic SD, guess who the odd judge out was? You guessed it... A Byrd
i. The W Ferguson/J Lopez SD, guess who the odd judge out was? You guessed it... A Byrd

I think thats enough for you to get the picture with Byrd. Remember the other 2 judges scored clearly for Calzaghe

6. Calzaghe beat Hopkins in America, at a new weight with 3 American judges and Cortez as ref.
7. Calzaghe scored the single highest score card against Hopkins ever 116-111.
8. The 2 judges that scored for Calzaghe agreed on 9 of the rounds
9. Calzaghe landed more on Hopkins than anyone ever.




Now I know there will be a flood of people coming on here noting Hopkins scoring a flash KD in the first round, and I agree that Hopkins did win a few rounds even when he didnt land as often, but people are mad if they think Calzaghe won on workrate, Calzaghe won because he was able to land his left more often than Hopkins could land his right.
Calzaghe finished the stronger and took away the moments Hopkins likes down the stretch.
Other thoughts, If Hopkins thought he was winning, do you think he would have been looking for time out and would bother trying to get points deducted off of Calzaghe, of course he wouldnt, Hopkins knew he was losing.

Yes I think there is a good chance Hopkins would have been stopped if there had of been a ref that didnt give Hopkins time out and let him hold illegally at a constant level.

What I do note is that nobody seems to mind Hopkins lost to Taylor. In the first Hopkins/Taylor fight, Jermaine was badly hurt and Hopkins looked the stronger at the end, yet it seems to upset alot of these people that Calzaghe beat Hopkins. Appears very biased.

:deal



The reason for this post again, is that nobody can debate against the solid facts and want to rewrite what happend, but the facts are facts

 

Salute.

 

So you do disagree with the thread title?

I think you'd also accept that whoever the referee there is a greater probability of a fight between joe and hopkins ending with the scorecards as opposed to a premature ending.

So you had it 7-5 joe? The fight is horrible to watch so I won't be scoring it any time soon.

 

Just watching Calzaghes fights on youtube, how the **** was he allowed an unbeaten record? Most of his earlier fights were with holds and rabbit punches.i saw his `victory`over Mark Delaney and that was the dirtiest win i`ve ever seen.

 

he used to trade before the trinidad fight.. his activity level was higher, yeah, but he still liked to rough his opponents up and trade with them. just admit you're wrong. or admit you haven't seen hopkins whole career. don't worry, i won't laugh.

and i never said that calzaghe had the power to stop hopkins at that point in his career... just said he hit harder than most thought.

 

got it in one. :good they like to cheat fighters over there. it's the only way the yanks can win these days.

 

I dont agree or disagree with anything. I said it is possible with a ref that stops illegal holding that Hopkins could have been stopped but you dont know how a fight will go until it has ended. Chavez-Taylor 1 proves that.
I thought Calzaghe was a wide clear winner, but said I watched it again recently and gave any close round that I scored to Calzaghe to Hopkins and even by doing that still felt Joe was a point winner

 

you've got a hard on for hopkins haven't you? that's why you slag joe off. can't accept that he beat him.

P.S. you're like an american prostitute. you ***** yourself out to them. you must be very insecure. :yep

 

no she didn't. you might punch like that, but not joe.

 

Well the thread title states definitely and you disagree with it surely?

You have to accept that there is a greater chance of a decision than a stoppage.

Yes and the time you watched it again you scored it 7-5 right?

Was it the first 5 you gave to hopkins when you rewatched.

 

calzaghe in his prime had power. he was a beast... hopkins knew this. that's why he avoided him.

you can take hopkins' ***** out your mouth now, as well.

 

he loves bailey really.