How does last night's outcome affect Calzaghe's standing?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by cuchulain, Oct 19, 2008.


  1. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,099
    11,130
    Jan 6, 2007
    About a month ago, I predicted that Bernard would 'upset' Kelly as Kelly had nowhere near the boxing skills of Calzaghe.

    http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2538333&highlight=Calzaghe#post2538333

    Conventional wisdom had it that Calzaghe defeated Bernard because Bernard was an old, over-the-hill fighter who didn't have the stamina to go 12 rounds.

    Now that a half-year OLDER Bernard has schooled and outclassed a prime Pavlik (Feared Middle-weight champion with two victories over Taylor and one over Miranda), maybe he WASN'T so over-the-hill after all !

    Could Calzaghe's style and pressure have had something to do with the outcome of his fight with Bernard ?


    In light of last night's result, should Calzaghe's win over Hopkins be upgraded from GOOD to GREAT ?
     
  2. san rafael

    san rafael 0.00% lemming Full Member

    27,684
    7
    Jun 11, 2008
    Wow, again, Hopkins has a very LONG HISTORY of not throwing enough punches and fighting overly conservative at different points THROUGHOUT his career. Hopkins didn't let his hands go enough against Calzaghe - AGAIN, yes, it happened AGAIN. NOT FOR THE FIRST ****ING TIME. Calzaghe was extremely fortunate that Hopkins did it AGAIN. There was NOTHING that Calzaghe did to limit Bernard's output. Bernard himself limited his output, AGAIN. Calzaghe was very very fortunate.
     
  3. darwoody

    darwoody New Member Full Member

    2
    1
    May 24, 2008
    Absolutely.
    Calzaghe's stock goes up after last night.
    It is also Calzaghe's best win.
     
  4. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,453
    1,713
    Nov 20, 2007
    Yes... I always said it was a fight between two fighters at 100%. The last 4 rounds are so overlooked that it hurts. Calzaghe took away B-Hops key weapons and was able to find more and more room for his own. No one since Roy could outsmart him. In the end, he just did that. But everyone remembers how Hopkins knocked Calzaghe down... well... you can't blame them, I mean 10 minutes later, you couldn't fight a crisp Hopkins right hand anymore.
     
  5. PugilisticPower

    PugilisticPower The Blonde Batman Full Member

    7,846
    35
    May 4, 2008
    Yeah, puts Hopkins as his best win above Kessler, Eubank, Reid and Lacy. It also validates his reasons for not fighting Pavlik instead of Jones Jr.

    Realistically, you could argue the case that with Calzaghe beating Hopkins who was a Top 5 P4Per, then Hopkins beating Pavlik who was a Top 10 P4P, both Hopkins and Calzaghe should be Top 3.

    Pacquaio "beat" JMM and that's what keeps him at number 1, but if Calzaghe comes out and beats Jones Jr, then I think you can throw him at 1.
     
  6. Lance_Uppercut

    Lance_Uppercut ESKIMO Full Member

    51,943
    2
    Jul 19, 2004
    Gotta agree. As great as Hopkins is, he does NOT fight the same in every fight. Of course, it is just easier to say it was ALL because of Calzaghe and taylor's superiority to Hops I guess.
     
  7. BigReg

    BigReg Broad Street Bully Full Member

    38,117
    5
    Jun 26, 2007
    It doesn't affect Calzaghe's standing at all. Calzaghe looked sloppy against Hopkins and ate pretty much all of the clean punches that were thrown in that fight. Calzaghe won that fight based on activity. Hopkins simply wasn't throwing punches. Calzaghe was walking into the same punch for 6 rounds. I give him credit for not getting discouraged and staying active, but the win is the same as it was before the Pavlik fight.
     
  8. Lance_Uppercut

    Lance_Uppercut ESKIMO Full Member

    51,943
    2
    Jul 19, 2004
    Thank you reg! :thumbsup
     
  9. Bodysnatcher

    Bodysnatcher Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,302
    0
    Oct 27, 2007
  10. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,099
    11,130
    Jan 6, 2007
    There seems to be an unwillingness among some to cede any credit to Calzaghe for how he fought against Hopkins.

    The over-the-hill theory is out the window.

    With his defeat of prime Pavlik, he has shown that he CAN do it, and for 12 rounds. He did not look as tired after 12 last night as he did after 6 against Calzaghe.


    So,

    is it possible that Calzaghe just fought in such a manner as to limit Hopkins' offence and make him expend energy ?

    It's not like Bernard wasn't in shape and motivated last April.

    Or was Calzaghe just a lucky Euro-bum 45 times ?
     
  11. Bodysnatcher

    Bodysnatcher Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,302
    0
    Oct 27, 2007
  12. SAS2

    SAS2 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,173
    2
    Jun 24, 2006
    it definitely improves the status of his win over hopkins by 2-fold. hopkins could not find a way to beat him, but calzaghe adapted and dominated down the stretch.

    with calzaghe, hopkins was in with a fighter at least of his stature. against pavlik, as it turns out it was a woeful mismatch.
     
  13. san rafael

    san rafael 0.00% lemming Full Member

    27,684
    7
    Jun 11, 2008
    Much agreed, well said.
     
  14. Toopretty

    Toopretty Custom made Full Member

    22,883
    1
    Jul 3, 2007
    Oh shut the **** up. Bhop did not throw alot against Tarver, Jermaine Taylor twice and Winky. And to end the note, when Calzaghe so called suffocated Bhop he is the one that got the worst out of every single exchange. Calzaghe did not land hardly any meaningful punches. Show me proof of him landing punches, show me a highlight or something. You CANT. B/c it did not happen. Calzaghe just threw a lot of slaps. That is all.
     
  15. san rafael

    san rafael 0.00% lemming Full Member

    27,684
    7
    Jun 11, 2008
    You disagree strongly? GREAT. Let me tell you how I feel about this; ^ BULL****. Calzaghe couldn't lay a glove on Hopkins. Hopkins couldn't miss Calzaghe. GTFOH. If you want to make a claim - have some BASIS for it.