Joe Calzaghe and technique

Exactly. Many people fail to see the art behind his work and they only hate on it because it may look "ugly". I personally think it's awesome. It's unique. He was a true champion, he defeated some of the best, retired undefeated, most of his matches were KO victories, how can people seriously hate on his style, when they see what he achieved with it? It was very effective.

 

Love him or hate him Joe Calzaghe was a very unique fighter and is one of my favorites. His shots didn't have huge power at all yet he was always/mostly the aggressor in his fights, go figure. I can't speak for everyone but personally I always like watching the scrappy type of boxer and I kind of miss Calzaghe now that he's retired.

 

I don't think we can look forward to seeing a boxer like him for a looong time... It's sad. It's guys like him who creates the variation of the sport.

 

Joe Calzaghe was a true great, loved his slapped punches and the funny **** he did such as in the Hopkins Calzaghe fight where Hopkins bent over and Calzaghe sttod behind him and wiggled his hips

 

Hopkins won the fight based on clean effective punching .

 

Hopkins is great, no doubt. And he made some clean shots. But he didn't win, according to the rules of boxing, and that's what matters in a boxing match (unless you're Sven Ottke). Calzaghe landed more punches :smoke

 

:?

 

its his response to lack of quality punching, he delivers random quantity instead, utillising his supreme fitness, when he finds he is being outclassed and outskilled as with Hopkins. This worked because he waited till hopsta was old, 50% fit and unable to hit as hard as he sued to, knowing that Bernard would no longer be able to match that pace anymore. Back in the day, that Cal technique would have seen him KOed by Bernard.

Thats not to say Cal wasnt skilled, he was about on par with Robin Reid for skills, but when he faced someone very skilled he was ****ed unless he waited till they were too old to keep up with his superfitness.

 

Scoring is subjective.

Calzaghe landed more but I preferred the quality of punches of Hopkins.

 

Why is it that Hopkins stamina was the problem against Calzaghe yet against younger fighters in Wright, Pavlik, Pascal it never became a problem.

Why did Hopkins turn down $3m (career high payday) to fight Calzaghe in America in 2002? Instead he fought Morrade Hakkar for $280k. It's a shame he didn't share your confidence.

 

Hopkins was getting pummled, thats what wore him down as the fight went on. Calzaghe technique was a joy to watch.

 

Brittle hands. When he throws straight punches with authority he risks reinjuring them. That was the whole reason behind the 'slaps'. A shame really cause the bloke had decent power and had great technique if he chose to use it...

 

because clearly and blatantly they fought at Hopkins pace, whereas Calzaghe clearly and blatantly used his large stamina advantage to clearly and blatantly throw more slaps than he had ever done in any fight ever.

you'd have to ask him.

You see, I cant tell you whats goes on in someones mind because the mind is invisible. I cant tell what you had for breakfast without you telling me.

But I shouldnt have to tell what clearly and blatantly happened in a fight that is perfectly visible for anyone with a pair of eyes to see, and what we know and see is what we have to judge people by, not what you want to invent and contrive.

I dont think I can make it anymore clear and blatant than that.