Hagler/Hopkins/Leonard/Calzaghe

Yeah, I think it works. But the account about Hagler/Leonard is biased towards Hagler. Both of these fights were very close and it depends on what you like.

 

No, it doesn't.

 

Not really biased toward Hagler, so to say. It states right at the beginning that SOME feel (then goes on to explain it in detail). It never states that the writer agreed in any way, just stated that there is opinion of the like out there.

I also agree with the original poster that the Calzaghe - Hopkins fight could EASILY be construed in the same light...but the difference in my opinion is...I had Hagler winning a close one...I had Calzaghe winning a close one in his.

 

Watch the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight again. I've seen it three times now (yes, I'm a masochist), just to be certain. Calzaghe won the fight. He even got in some nice left hands to Hopkins head in the later rounds. He controlled the pace and frustrated Hopkins to no end. Every round was close, but Calzaghe clearly won more rounds, at least by two if not three.

 

I would disagree with the notion that "Hopkins controlled the pace of the fight from the 4th round on".. I think that Hopkins was really in the fight, and it was very close for the first 4-5 rounds, after that, for me I had joe taking over more and more, with hopkins looking to just nullify any attack from joe - at the expense of producing any form of offense himself. I actually had it 9:3 (calzaghe) i think - with an extra point for the knockdown, i did start to watch it again but stopped after 3 rounds due to going out.

I remember a lot of people - brooklyn, kg0208 etc scored it not too dissimilar to me, i think it was them - i'd need to lookup the thread, and considering this was one of my first goes - if not the first, at scoring a live bout, i was actually really really chuffed that some of the more respected posters had it all quite similar to me.

 

calzaghe was never gonna knock hopkins out. he wasnt even gonna hurt him. but what bernard did he shouldnt be patted on the back for. he did nothing but wait for the southpaw to come foreward and release a right hand.

after a few rounds calzaghe had him covered. he went foreward made the counterpuncher fire his bolt and then went after him. all hopkins could do is move slip and at some point run to his right to get tou the way.

calzaghe mos def won the fight. but looked bad doing it. there was nothing but a few right hands (which in some cases were mistimed and missed all together) that are supposd to be of swung the balance but it was clear that hopkins didnt do enough to win the rounds. and besides apart form the later rounds when did you ever see bernard take the fight to joe.

i personally feel that 3 light taps overall 1 strong punch. if you can combo those hard punches then it would possibly win you the round.



the leonard-hagler comparison is the complete opposite to this. this would be like hagler sitting on the ropes doing nothing for the few rounds while leonard roames foreward every round.

 

I had Hopkins and Leonard winning. The difference in the fights is that Leonard's flurries were actually landing.

 

When i first watched it i think i scored it a draw or had Calzaghe by a point. The second time i watched it i had Calzaghe winning by three points.

Other people i have spoken to find that aswell. I think because Calzaghe was quite sloppy and threw in bursts, often with his first shot missing, it was easy to miss the shots he was actually landing with during those flurries.

 

it doesnt work hagler was walking down leonard where bhop was laying back and countering completly different

 

No - Calzaghe CLEARLY beat Hopkins.

atsch

Are you blind or just stupid?

:huh

 

if the fight was made 5-10 years ago, would have been a hopkins win by a massive score.

hopkins was in his 40's in this fight

 

I love when people mistake their own opinion for the opinion of the masses.

Sorry to break this to you bro...but the VAST majority of people (fans, fighters, media, etc.) feel it was a very close fight.