I think it has much to do with the standard of opponent. Also, Hopkins can make anyone look slow and ponderous!
If your a big Joe fan and biassed then Joe has clearly lost a step or two since Kessler. Or since Byron Mitchell if you like. That was the shade of Calzaghe against Hopkins. If your a little bit like this ****ing windowlicker I've just quoted then you alow your bias against a particular fighter become glaringly obvious and so everyone knows your opinion is worth **** all on this particular subject. 3 years time it will be a different fighter, same tired, bs argument.
He's been fighting C level competition for years. He steps in against Hopkins and its obvious what would have happened had he been fighitng in America 10 years ago.
I thought that Joe looked like a 'shot' fighter against Bika. 'Shot' turned out to be an exaggeration but Calzaghe has declined markedly since his peak years ('97 - 2003).
I agree. Joe was already past his physical prime when he fought Lacy. He'd lost some speed by then already.
his last 4 fights you can see the speed going from him. against kessler he was fighting to prove he was the best now he is fighting for money so i do not think you will see Joe as he used to be and that is a shame
I don't think he has faded - but he has stepped up his opponents - which of course makes him look worse - it's so much easier to look good versus Ashira & Manfredo then it is versus Kessler - and well against Hopkins you just can't look good - come to think of it - a fight with Hopkins in corner can never look good...
Joe has a couple left in him, he isnt in his prime, he cant be after so many years fighting but he is still the best out there. Hopkins is the one that ruined the fight, its his tactics that made Joe looked bad, if he hugged less, joe would have got off with more punches simple as that. Put someone in front of joe who actually wants to fight and you will see another master class.