Nothing was easy, but Hopkins rendered Calzaghe highly ineffective. Feining low blows is part of Hopkins game - he does it to frustrate and to steal rounds. The success of Calzaghe's offense was greatly minimized because Hopkins dictated the fight with movement and clinches - the bout fell into his rhythm, and while Hopkins did slow down, Calzaghe was never able to punish him there. The bottom line is Calzaghe swayed the judges and public opinion because he threw more leather, regardless of the quality - Hopkins rounds were clear, Calzaghe edged many by throwing punches that were largely blocked. It's true, the British commentary prasied Calzaghe at one point for what was supposedly "A good left hand!" When hopkins high right nicely blocked it - more praise there for Hopkins defence.
I watched the fight again last night. The 11th (which I'd originalkly give to Hopkins) was the one wherein he faked the low blow. Cortez didn't indicate it was low, so was it a body shot? It didn't show a replay on setanta, anyone seen it from a different angle?
Hi everybody, it has been quite a while. I missed the classic forum, really. Even though I couldn't post since last year, I tried to stay on the news and watch the biggest fights (Marquez-Vasquez III, Pacquiao-Marquez II were awesome). And so I watched the Hopkins - Calzaghe fight. not in the same league as the previous fights I watched. Very close fight, I have to say, both fighters did very well throughout the twelve rounds. In my opinion, Calzaghe's activity gave him the edge. Hopkins did landed the cleaner, harder punches but Joe was just throwing more punches down the stretch. I had Calzaghe 7-5, 114-113 (with the down) but it could have gone either way. I am glad to be back among you.
I wouldn't say that Hopkins was robbed but I'm in the minority in thinking he won the fight. I don't care much for aggression and activity if punches aren't landing. Hopkins landed more clean shots. I had to watch it again, often putting in slow-mo to see if the punches land, to make sure.
They showed the replay a couple of times, they even interviewed him and he commented on it. Basically it was a low blow, just not a particularly hard one. I also believe it happened in the 10th, not the 11th, as I recall wondering how much time these antics really benefited him by. As far as the fight itself goes, I thought the scoring pretty mirrored the action in the ring. Hopkins won the first couple of rounds, and he should have been far more aggessive just after the knock down, afterwards, Calzaghe was able to find his rythme and control the flow of the fight.
Welcome back. How did you score Marquez v Pacquiao II? Hopkins against Calzaghe wasn't a pretty sight. Hopkins' style obviously had a lot to do with the poor spectacle. However, he was clever and accurate in there at times. Calzaghe's technique leaves a lot to be desired. Very wide punches, plenty of quantity without quality. I liked the way Hopkins covered up as if he was ready to fall into a clinch before triggering off the straight right hand which dumped Calzaghe on the canvas.
Couple of things. I am currently in a computing formation (almost done) and I got back in the gym to fight again. It took me quite much of time. Actually, I couldn't even see my friends. I graduated 6 years ago and I would have never thought it would be so damn hard to get back to school. Anyway, here I am, fine and healthy.
Hey how are you doing ? About Marquez-Pacquiao II, it was a very close fight too. I had Pacquiao winning by 1 point (can't remember exactly my round by round scoring). The knock down in round 3 three definitely gave him the fight. What a fight by the way.