Comparing Calzaghe and Hopkins

:good

 

I personally reckon they're about even. Calzaghes win over Hopkins was razor thin and could have gone either way. Rubbish fight, certainly won't be re-watching it.

Those who claim people have to jump to Calzaghe's defence in order to maintain his reputation, are the same people who are just as quick to stick the boot in whenever they get a chance to. Everyone knows Kessler lost to Ward, everyone knows Taylor beat Hopkins then lost to others etc etc.

It's ridiculous that people still feel the need to support only 1 of them, and defame the other. Is it impossible to not like both and believe they are of similar accomplishment? How about maybe agreeing that it's a subjective matter and peoples opinion can differ according to their own personal preferences?

People need to get over it!

 

:happy

 

me summing up their careers based on top victories.

Calzaghe: eubank, reid, mitchell, lacy, kessler, hopkins

Hopkins: de la hoya, trinidad, holmes, pavlik, wright, tarver, johnson

calz was a long time smw champ and eventually unified.

b-hop was a long time middleweight champ and eventually unified.

both jumped up to win a title at lhw.

calz retired essentially 5 fights after his biggest victory (lacy - undoubtedly)

b-hop is still going strong 10 years after his biggest victory (tito - undoubtedly)

h2h it will always be close and debatable with either side having valid points.

as for legacy, due to longevity i think hopkins takes it. IMO b-hop is a top 10 atg fighter. joe is maybe top 30.

the dilemma really is it is unfeasible for joe to have done better other than moving up sooner.

 

no offense buddy... but your making out like Calzaghe walked all over hopkins? but as i recall Calzaghe seemed just as relieved to get the descision as you sound :rofl bernard hopkins, beat trinidad, DLH, roy jones jr, pavlik, winky wright, antonia tarver, glen johnson etc... calzaghe wishes he had a resume like that. thats why people side with bernard hopkins, there resume's are not even close... hands down bernard is the better boxer, skilz, head movement, even punching power!!! the only advantage calzaghe has over hopkins is volume punching... literally nothing more :bbb

 

hopkins....IMO is in another league then JC. I still think hopkins would beat JC in the rematch today.

 

again i disagree... if were comparing the two (as the thread states) then just look at the resumes of both fighters and for me Hopkins miles ahead.

even in the skillz department i would have to give the edge to hopkins.

not saying Calzaghe was not great cause he was... emense!!!... but for career, skillz, and resume bernard hopkins is one of the top 5 middleweights of all time... :deal

 

:good

 

I rank Calzaghe higher because he beat Hopkins.
Calzaghe hasn't a great resume but neither has Hopkins IMO beating big name WW's & lesser fighters than Calzaghe (Pavlik,Tarver) doesn't impress me personally.
These threads do no good IMO. You just get B-Hop fans shittin on JC & JC fans shittin on B-Hop. Same as the FMJ/Pac bull****.

 

Hopkins lost twice to Jermain Taylor, yeah they were close fights and everything but these fights seems to get brushed over far too easily when discussing how good Hopkins' resume is. You just know if Calzaghe had 2 losses to a fighter of Taylor's ability he'd be ripped apart by some American fans.

 

another damn calzaghe thread

 

if look look at both thier middleweight title defences there really isnt that much difference in the level of opposition. Hopkins has fought a lot of bums too and people tend to overlook that. Seems to me his biggest/riskiest fights are taken when he has the 'old' excuse to fall back on. dontget me wrong though hes a FHOF no doubt

 

The fact that Calzaghe fans put the shot Jones Jnr as one of Calzaghe's best wins is testament to how poor his record is.