Could Joe Calzaghe still be undefeated if he fought Roy Jones Jr's opponents?

You could save yourself the time and just state the facts: Lewis had a greater resume, greater skills/abilities, greater achievements. Done. :good

 

atsch

No, if Hopkins beat a WW Trinidad then he would get full credit for beating a prime Trinidad. Beating him at MW isn't the same.

Cutting off sentence's? On another thread I wrote you a detailed post, and you just cut pretty much all of it out and ignored it. Hence I won't bother to take the time to reply to your posts in detail

 

I'll re-post again and own this imbecile all over again just to make sure...

Hmmm...


Did I say that? :think

Sorry pal, you failed your reading comprehension test. Go to the back of the class next to Failey and Prof I C Chins. atsch

 

- Trinidad was 29 when Hopkins beat him

- The best Tito ever looked was at 154 not 147

- Trinidad turned in one of the most impressive, dominant and devastating performances of his life in his previous fight... which was at 160

- Trinidad was a world mw champion when he fought Hopkins, he had already proven he could be effective there

- Trinidad was 5ft 11in with a 72 1/2in reach, he was not undersized for a mw fighter (in fact, he weighed in heavier than Hopkins did on the night)

- Trinidad was at his highest ever p4p ranking when he fought Hopkins (#2) - this doesn't support that he was "past his best" by then, as you have said on this thread

- Why was Tito an overwhelming favourite to win if he was "past his best"??

- Can you please explain which fights of Tito's you seen in the run-up to the Hopkins fight that showed you Tito was "past his best"?


You've been getting embarrassed by me for pages now, but I am very happy to keep obliging you :smoke

 

Yes you did say it, it's there in the quote you keep on re-posting. Calzaghe fought at mid-range though he was also adept ont he inside. It wouldn't take place in a phone-booth. It's all hypothetical, but it would probably have been at a mid-range like most of Calzaghe's fights

But if you want to continue to argue with yourself, and convince yourself that you've achieved something, please go ahead. I'm not the only one laughing at you :hi:

 

After the Hopkins fight, he went 2-2 and retired.

He spent the majority of his career at WW! Had less than a handful of fights at 154

Hopkins spent most of his early career having fights above 160 up to 175, Trinidad was fighting at 147.

Why doesn't Marciano get full credit for beating guys like Moore and Charles? Because they were at their best in the lower weight divisions!

Who considers Trinidad a great MW? Fact - Hopkins never beat a great MW

A quick indicator of this, when people do H2H match ups with Trinidad, they're at the lower weights, not at MW

Another point, if you're going to bring up P4P as an argument, Hopkins was ranked number 4 when Calzaghe beat him, and turned in one of his most 'destructive' performances right after, so surely Calzaghe deserves huge credit for the win?

 

I'll re-post again and own this imbecile all over again just to make sure...

Hmmm...


Did I say that? :think

Sorry pal, you failed your reading comprehension test. Go to the back of the class next to Failey and Prof I C Chins. atsch

 

All irrelevant.

Trinidad was still in his prime when he fought Hopkins.

He was WBA world middleweight champion coming off one of the most devastating performances of his career, and was the world p4p#2.

These are just facts. :smoke

 

- Calzaghe didn't deserve the decision

- Hopkins was a significantly lesser fighter than he'd been in his 1996/7-2002/3 peak, Trinidad was not a lesser fighter in any way to any previous point in his career. As I keep telling you, Tito fans consider him to have been at his very best at lmw, and his win over Joppy at 160 was as good as anything else he ever done. You are just a Calzaghe fanboy who wastes everyones' time trying to convince people that a Bernard Hopkins with no power and very little stamina and who had already lost to Jermain Taylor was a prime Hopkins, absolutely laughable to anyone who actually watched his fights 96-03

:good

 

No it's not, and that's why you've avoided responding directly to it

 

Yes he did

Right, so you think Trinidad was as good as ever? On the basis that he turned in one of his best performances directly before, and was rated very highly P4P

Okay, fair enough

So then applying your logic, how was Hopkins toothless when he turned in one of his most destructive performances right after the Calzaghe fight, and was rated number 4 P4P?

You can't have it both ways.

Either, Trinidad was very much close to his best and so was Hopkins, or neither were. If you want to give Hopkins credit, you have to give Calzaghe credit. If you want to take away from Calzaghe, you have to take away from Hopkins

 

Because I'd be repeating points I've already made several times. Your brain doesn't grasp why these points have already been answered/refuted. Obviously, Tito was prime when he met Hopkins. He was p4p#2 (highest ever placing), he was 29, he was coming off 2 of the biggest wins and best performances of his career, and he was WBA world mw champ. Obviously, he was in his prime. There is no permissible argument to the contrary. :hi:

 

My answers are still as below. You have adequately refuted nothing here, just parroting the same old rubbish again and again:

:smoke

 

So now you're completely avoiding what I've written.

Makes sense, you obviously can't respond without tripping yourself up.

If you have nothing else to offer then that's that :hi:

 

Atleast 60% of the people on here know **** about boxing