Hopkins vs. Calzaghe: Punch By Punch

Disappointed that Joe Cortez did nothing about it. Hopkins basically invented a new way of cheating.

If he'd won.............other fighters might have copied his winning formula

:happy Not

Is that the legacy Hopkins wants to leave behind?

 

Classic!!

Hopkins hardly won a round after the first. He backpeddled for 11 rounds,held at every opportunity and feigned injury like an nancy boy Argentinian footballer. A VERY poor performance from Borenard. He deserved to lose and he DID lose

 

No. To quote toffeejack ''He also knows though that he was the only one pushing the fight and was very frustrated by Hopkins cheating, spoiling tactics. Couple that with the fact that he doesn't like the guy what with the way Bhop conducted himself throughout the whole affair and you can't blame him for not wanting a second fight.''

Joe knows that the first fight was crap and it would be more of the same 2nd time around. Why give Hopkins another payday?

 

Calzaghe landed at least as many solid shot and hundreds of extra slaps on top and was the ring general throughout.

"Calzaghe 119 - Hopkins 108" even is more arguable than any scorecard in Hopkins favour. It is at least consistant.

 

i think you need to think long and hard about whether boxings for you because you obviously have no clue about it or how to score a fight. That scorecard means you would have had to have scored round 1 to calzaghe you know that means a 10-8 round right dick

 

Actually it would have meant I scored the first round 9-9. Not that it is my real scorecard or anything mate.

 

how sad are you.get over it calzaghe won,you havent counted any of the millions of calzaghe`s slaps.
computibox dont lie.
​

 

compubox is just a bunch of people sitting at ringside counting and tallying shots they're as prone to error as judges or you and i

 

why would you score it 9-9 calzaghe didnt land anything that round (speaking hypothetically of course)

 

Give Hopkins another payday?? I think he is a bit past that sort of nonsense, don't you? He is a 43-year-old legend who won his first world title 13 years ago, has been involved in some enormous fights, and is still earning. I do not think his motivation for getting big fights now is money.

Joe knows the first fight was by far the most difficult he has ever had, Hopkins's skills gave him a torrid time, and Team Calzaghe was terrified they had lost at the final bell. Why have another fraught evening spent landing nothing and looking terrible, when he could humiliate feeble opposition like the current version of Roy Jones?

 

Compubox cannot adequately differentiate between types of punches, cannot accurately quantify punches, cannot measure the impact of a punch - just some of the reasons why fans with brains do not rate it, do not respect it, never cite it.

 

Why would you score the round 9-9 though ********? It was a 10-8 automatic.

 

I'm surprised that there are still people trying to argue that Calzaghe deserved to win that fight. Watch it again without commentary and it's pretty clear.

 

I say good work too. I watched the fight online with not the best quality picture and I thought Hopkins should've won but that the fight was very close (tho boring). I obviously couldn't see every punch because of the quality of the video and I could obviously see that Calzaghe was more active. So after reading all of the posters who said calzaghe deserved the win, I conceded that he must have done more in the way of scoring blows. But I would like to see it again for myself on a high quality video (but doubt i will because it seemed a boring fight). Judges should put as much 'focus' into scoring as san rafael does but it is a little more difficult live.

 

Again, Calzaghe won. He was much busier & Borenardo should've lost points for his fakery and bad acting.