Hopkins would have beaten Calzaghe decisively in a rematch. Yes/No?

He outsmarted him if you're an idiot.

Calzaghe outworked Hopkins, nothing else.

 

you do know this is a boxing forum don't you? the place people talk boxing. you understand that don't you?

THEN TALK BOXING AND SHUT THE **** UP!. what you're writing means nothing, idiot.

my names not Assassin either you ****ing cabbage.

 

I don't know it would be like the Taylor rematch. Nothing was really decisive

 

Hey "assasin," learn how to spell assassin. And while you're at it, stop generalizing Americans. Hopkins lost the fight and Joe won and moved on. Joe would not beat any version of Hopkins, as the fight was very close and competitive.

 

If Hopkins opens up more like he did against Pavlik and Pascal, Calzaghe would land noticeably more than he did in the first fight.

Hopkins' best chance to beat Calzaghe was to make it as ugly as possible and to attempt to tie up and smother Calzaghe's offense after Bernard threw- which is the gameplan he employed in the first fight. Jump in with a lead right, then tie up.

Bernard fought the smartest fight he could against Calzaghe the first time around and it wasn't enough. The rematch either plays out like the first one, with an overly negative style just not scoring enough for the judges, or Hopkins loses by sacrificing some of his defense to try and keep up with Calzaghe's workrate.

 

fukk who brought this chump back:twisted:

 

That is exactly how I would have viewed any rematch, more of the same with Calzaghe winning again, or Hopkins 'sacrificing some of his defense to try and keep up with Calzaghe's workrate', with Calzaghe winning easily.

 

Nahhhhh, Hopkins still wouldn't be able to cope with Joe's workrate, in fact it would just gas earlier:deal

 

atsch No he didnt!

 

I had Hopkins winnning the first fight by a point (6 rounds a piece with a 10-8 round in the first) and would have picked him to win a remtach by clearer margins.

 

Same fight without the knockdown. Calzaghe wins wider.

Prime for Prime much tougher. From a legacy standpoint Bhop is probably ahead now. Unbelievable longevity. However, trying to belittle Calzaghes great achievements makes people look bias.

Both great fighters, but head to head at the end of Calz career it's hard to see Bhop winning. He's not knocking him out and he's not outscoring him when throwing such a significant amount of fewer punches.

So much Anti-any other Country by some of the US fans. Even Lewis didn't get any respect in the US until reletively late in his career when the evidence was too clear to ignore.

 

:deal

Calzhage just has his number.

 

A better chance of getting slapped silly to a UD loss. The Calzaghe loss is sandwiched between some of Hopkins greatest and definately his most credible wins (Tarver, Wright & Pavlik, Pascal). if he could've fought like he did in those fights against Joe, he would have.

 

Calzaghe wins..Same as first fight without the knockdown for B-Hop who I had winning 114-113 in the first fight. That was Calzaghes first fight at 175 and abroad. He would have learnt alot from that and won the rematch by 2-3 rounds

 

Hopkins won the first fight I scored it 7-4-1, Hopkins. Hopkins controlled the paced and landed at a higher percentage and hurt and knocked down Calslappy. Calslappy knew he got a gift decision win that's why he never Hopkins a rematch a retired with no real legacy.