Hopkins-Calzaghe scorecard with notes

I'm at uni, and I'm well ahead in my work. When I want to take some time to educate the masses, I take it :good

 

If some guy having a 4-point margin of victory in a fight he scored makes you not like the sport of boxing anymore, you certainly should not be in here!!

 

What a lot of bollocks. I have clearly included notes on the fight to show why I scored rounds the way I did. I'm not a massive Bernard Hopkins fan, but one of the key principles that I score by is the guy doing the cleaner, more effective work is winning the rounds. That goes for ANY fight, not just this one. I assume you scored Alexander-Kotelnik for Alexander, and Toney-Jirov for Jirov, since you seem to worship workrate above all else (as that's the only thing Joe Calzaghe achieved in that fight).

But don't worry, your low-level Compubox-oriented understanding of boxing does not come even close to turning me off the sport I love!! :good

 

All comments were welcome...

...until the comments started to be dominated by idiots like you who don't know how to score a fight but enjoy chucking about insults instead.

Don't cry about it now, you reap what you sow! :good

 

When I say "all comments welcome" on a boxing forum, I expect knowledgable boxing fans to make insightful comments, have a reasoned debate. I did not expect gimps like you to continually spew pointless single-sentence insults, and contribute nothing else. Perhaps my standards were too high. Thank you for lowering them for future scorecard threads!!

You see, I don't think the even rounds can be given to Calzaghe. As I say, you clearly value hitting air more than I do. I don't see that as worthy of winning rounds.

Castillo-Mayweather 1 was a worse decision than Hopkins-Calzaghe because at least one judge in Hopkins-Calzaghe was someway close to the right verdict. In Castillo-Mayweather all three were way off.

 

:huh So what the **** does that have to do with anything???

This cretin really really does not have the foggiest idea of how boxing should be scored. What possible difference does it make who was where, what is important is who landed the cleaner, more effective punches in each round, and over the piece that was Hopkins.

If you think a guy with his back on the ropes cannot be winning a fight, I strongly suggest you watch Mayweather vs Hatton , Toney vs Jirov, or one of countless others from boxing history where fights are conclusively won from the ropes. Thoroughly idiotic comment.

 

In more rounds, Hopkins landed the cleaner, more effective, more decisive punches.

You value hitting air and flapping arms, I do not. Different strokes for different folks.