Calzaghe

Some fairly major gaps in your thinking here, still.

Roy was 24 and not yet prime when he decisively beat Bernard (28 and not yet prime either) by 8-4.

It could be considered one of Bernard's best fight in that at least he was competitive with Roy at a time when no-one else was and Roy was hardly dropping any rounds, much less fights.

(IMO, Bernard's best fight was stopping Johnson)

Jones went on to clean up SMW (except for Calzaghe, who he would have beaten) and then on to LHW where he again cleaned up, save for Darius, who would also have beaten.

With no more challenges in sight at LHW, he moved up again and won a piece of the heavywt title from a boring but effective Ruiz. If he'd been wise, he'd have hung them up at that point. But he succumbed to Tarver's goading and weight drained himself back down to 175 at a time when his career disapation light was flashing. He still beat Tarver, and that should definitely have been quitting time for him.

But he fought again, at 34 and got nailed by the perfect punch and ****ed up his legacy, somehat.

That was NOT the version of Roy that fought Hopkins.

Prime Roy (1994-2002) would have killed Tarver.

(BTW, I'm still waiting for your response to post #38 of this thread)

 

Here is the first response to it.

Good post.:good

 

Thanks.

But i meant I was wa still waiting for Still~style to respond to it.

Looks like you're headed for an easy USD 2000 from that other guy.

 

Anyone know what happened to Bustalip.

He joined in Mid Dec, posted three or four hundred times and then disappeared from all archived threads (other than quotes) on Christmas day.


Did he do a bad thing ?

 

is this the same nigel benn who never lost to an american? the same benn who smashed barkley out in one round? who was underdog against dewitt and wasted him? both in their backyard, both considered good enough opponents for toney a few years later? the same benn that beat the feared g-man who was in line for a shot at RJJ? yeah thought so.

 

And Hopkins LOST to Taylor who is nowhere near being great

 

Hopkins won maybe 4 rounds AT THE MOST. Get a grip man.

So being bigger then two BLOWN WW's makes Hopkins...your words...****IN HUGE? :huh

Tito's size allowed him to fill up nicely. He was probably best suited for 154, but that's not too much a stretch from 160.

:roll: FOr someone who thinks they are some super intellect, your reasoning is pretty simple here.

That's your problem...you think you can "logic" your way through an argument. You and CHJ look for formulas to base predictions on. None exsist in boxing.

And I hope you realize, you STILL have not said how Kessler is a bigger win for Joe C then ANY of Hopkins victories.

 

The question is - who could he've fought?

RJJ - a little early and Joe wasn't high profile enough
Hopkins - avoid him
Ditto Ottke
Toney - already too heavy

after that umm....

Eric Lucas? Beyer? Mundine?

TBH to beat the highest rated he would've had to move up to Light Heavy earlier, travelled and probably got beaten just like Hatton did...

Instead his confidence is thru the roof, he's kept improving, retained most of his speed and he's still unbeaten!

 

Lance, name me in your opinion what Hopkins' best win is and I will compare that win to Kessler objectively.

 

Hopkins best wins are against Welterweights, like it or not. Neither of those fighters amounted to anything great at 160

He also lost to Jermain Taylor...

Of course Kessler is a better win

 

How about you just answer me first. It's pretty obvious your trying not too...likely because you can't. You, objective? PLease.... :roll:

 

Of course, you are THE biggest homer on this board and bring ZERO objectivity to the table when it comes to British fighters.

I wasn't reading but i bet you were saying how Hatton would destroy PBF right?