Hopkins: Joe Calzaghe was more difficult an opponent than Roy Jones Jnr

And I'm sure Hopkins knows that as well, as I've never heard him say that he was in the same stage for both fights- it'd be pretty crazy if he did. So I don't think that he's completely unaware or oblivious, that's just his 2 cents. If the opinion of a fighter whose fought both is worthless, what's everyone else's worth?

 

could hopkins be trying to show some respect to calzaghe (i think it's genuine but..) in hopes of getting that lucrative rematch?

 

If we could hook B-Hop up to a detector test, he would have to admit he had to fake a low blow to keep from getting KO'd by the "pitter-Patter" punches.

 

yea no **** he was more difficult, you were 43 years old

 

As a boxing fan I don`t have respect for Hopkins because his boring style sends me to sleep. I actually like fighter like Calzaghe who actualy throw a bit of leather.

 

Please see link to thread I started on that subject the day before you joined the forum.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=103311


A majority of respondents felt Joe's Hopkins was better.

 

Hopkins lost the fight to Joe by being outworked, and him lacking the sufficient stamina to carry on - both are directly related to him being 43.

Skillwise, Hopkins made Joe look very amature at times.

 

Good for you. I consider it completely useless.:good

 

If he hasn't fought either of them under comparable circumstances, then how can he say who was the more difficult opponent (especially considering Roy beat him easier than Joe did anyway) overall? Unless he's just basing it on analyzing the two of them rather than comparing how both matched up with him at the time.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree that Calzaghe is a better or more difficult fighter than Roy Jones Jr. Not by a long ****ing shot.

 

he's just saying that a was a tougher fight than b. simple, i dont think he's saying joe is a better fighter than jones . but its still interesting .and it should tell the knobs slating calzaghe every five minutes ( i know you're not one ) that calzaghe is a formidable fighter , if hopkins ( who recently proved he has a lot left after dismantling the boxer most of said knobs were championing just a month ago )says it was a tougher fight than against a prime jones . its worth noting for these people, not useless.

 

Why can't he call it under any circumstances to say who was more difficult? Pea, I never thought you were this stupid, honest. You're usually a reasonable poster. For Hopkins to give his opinion, he doesn't need to fight both under comparable circumstances. He's simply giving a straight forward awnser out who was the most difficult to fight out of Jones and Calzaghe as he fought them both. Hopkins fought each, although at vastly different stages of his career and also their careers, and gave his opinion. Simple.

 

Calzaghe fought the better hopkins because Hopkins was more skilled techinqlly and had more ring smarts and ring savy. But neither of them fought Hopkins at his best.

 

Well considering Jones beat him more convincingly than Calzaghe did, I don't get how Calzaghe was the more difficult opponent.

 

So what the **** was stupid about what I said? I agree with that. That was basically the point I was making, there is no comparison that can be made between the two given the circumstances they were fought under, and therefore the premise of this thread is useless.

This thread was essentially made to compare Jones and Calzaghe as opponents based on what Bernard said, and given the circumstances, the comparison can't be made. You honestly think the point of the thread was just to inform people of Hopkins's opinion if it held no bearing on a comparison between the two? You're usually not that stupid, Rob.

 

Hopkins was asked who was the most difficult out of Calzaghe and Jones, he fought both at different stages of his own career and Calzaghe and Jones were also at different ends of the stick. He gave a straight forward awnser, which was 'Calzaghe'.

Me and you can argue that Jones was more difficult, depending how any individual seen both fights. Some people have Jones-Hopkins as a close affair, some for Jones widely. Same with Hopkins against Calzaghe. Johnny Bos had Calzaghe beating Hopkins by 9 rounds to 3. Some had Hopkins edging the fight.

If Ali was asked "Who gave you the most difficult time, Liston or Spinks" It's obvious he would say Spinks. Ali was in his prime when he beat Liston and was shot when he fought Spinks. That can't be argued at all, but neither can Ali's awnser be disputed in anyway shape or form. Although the comparison is far wider than the Jones-Hopkins-Calzaghe, but the same scenario.