Joe Calzaghe - Bernard Hopkins The Record Comparison Part 2

I'm not saying Joe is different just that neither the Hopkins fight, or especially, the Kessler fight was that close or disputed and people are still asking for rematches. If people still want a Kessler rematch to prove that Calzaghe is the better fighter what hope has he got of changing their minds after the way he beat Kessler in the first fight? He could rematch Hopkins, win another clear decision and the same people who thought he'd lost the first fight would just convince themselves he'd lost again.

Is the historical view of Durans career at all affected by him not giving Buchanon a rematch? Is Lewis'?

These are just guys they beat and didn't give rematches to, just footnotes to their career. It happens.

 

There is no way Kessler deserves a rematch - imo, personally I think Hopkins has more then a case - it is only his, and Joes age that has stopped it.

I think Joe beat Kessler more then convincingly - I certainly don't feel the same about the Hopkins fight.

Sure, Joe probably did enough technically to win it on points - but there are a lot of questions from that fight.

If they both retire - then fine fair enough - but if they both fight again, and Hopkins wants it, a rematch is fair I feel.

But then again Dawson would be great... ahh their both about to retire anyway..

 

Not rematching Vit' has left a slight mark I think.

 

To me, its up to Calzaghe. He has the win over Hopkins, from a legacy point of view he can take or leave the rematch. I don't see Hopkins calling for it matters one way or the other?

Having said that, if Joe beats Jones then Hopkins would be a good sign off fight now Pavlik is off the radar.

 

I nearly went further into this and thought you might pick up on it!! :good

Its a very sight mark, the nature of the win (behind on points and on a cut), the fact it was Lewis' last fight and that people could claim Klit "retired" Lewis played a part. Calzaghe beat Hopkins on points and continues to fight, not really comparable IMO.

 

I see your point - it makes little sense for Joe to get into another messy scrap with Hopkins. It would add little to his legacy.

From my own perspective it is a fight I would perhaps like to see - I think popkins did enough to deserve a rematch, and as I said after his performance last night he still holds a little intrigue.

 

Pops did enough to earn a remtch with Mighty Joe???

Hopkins beat Joe first time out. Calzaghe got a gift, & now the vast majority on here are proclaiming Joe as some sort of elite monster cos Pavlik fought like an idiot against an old old school fighter. You couldnt make it up.
This Calzaghe loving is really getting on my tits, especially as I remember not so long ago you could count Calzaghes fans on ESB on one hand. & I aint kidding.
Ever since Ricky got his L against Floyd, the bandwagon jumping onto the welsh dragons wagon has been utterly cringeworthy.

Its like it wasnt Hopkins that beat Pavlik, it was Joe!!! This place has gone Calzaghe crazy, & im pretty stunned by it all. People should remember Joe talked himself out of a fight with Pavlik, before giving Joe all the credit for Hopkins win.
Its brit fanboyism gone out of control...

 

Be fair Dunky mate. All people are saying is that Hopkins beating Pavlik makes Calzaghes win over Hopkins look more impressive, or at least removes the main question mark against it (ie. that Hopkins was shot).

Don't confuse arguing a particular side of an issue with "fanboyism" or "jumping the bandwagon". People don't always fall neatly into huggers and haters, some just like to discuss the issues of the day. I can take or leave Calzaghe as a fighter (in terms of entertainment, not skill) and as a character, me taking his side on certain things just means that I think he has a case, not that I've jumped ship from the ESB Hatton fanclub (who I do like as a fighter and character) since the Mayweather KO.

 

Gaz, you are talking to me the way a father talks to his petulant son.

Listen. I dont confuse anything. I just state my opinion. & my opinion is... what is stated above.
I never once accused you of 'jumping ship' or anyone else for that matter. I was just generalising. Its a well known fact that you couldnt find a Calzaghe fan apart from a couple of regular taffs & Max Molyneux here not so long ago. Now that I hve to read thread upon thread, post after post about how great Calzaghe is cos he beat Pavlik(oops sorry, I meant Bernard )
Yup, thats how it reads to me. We got fanboys wanting to talk up Calzaghe for ducking Pavlik, & letting Hopkins beat him & then proclaiming it was Calzaghes win really.
ITS PATHETIC.

Im not confusing ****. I know what Im reading, & its a rewriting of history on this forum. I reserve my right to question the newfound legions of Calzaghe fans claiming hes the **** cos Calzaghe decisioned Hopkins, especially as Calzaghe got dropped & scored a highly contoversial points win over BHop.

& now I am just supposed to hang back & bite my lip cos everyone is climing Calzaghe is the new king of kings...

Give me some slack for a change Gaz, Im sick of everyone here moaning at me just cos I dont agree with whats cool to agree with on brit ESB at any given moment.

After all, Im a cynical SOB with a memory like an elephant here...

 

Hopkins deserves a rematch with Joe as I believe he only lost by the slimmest of margins.
However do people remember that it was actually a bit of **** fight?
Do we really want to sit through that again?

 

nice one beat boxer, enjoyed the read and i think your right its very close, but hopkins jsut edges it for me despite his loses.

 

deleted

 

nice one beat boxer, enjoyed the read and i think your right its very close, but hopkins jsut edges it for me despite his loses.

 

Can't believe people actually scored Calzaghe/Hopkins to Hopkins, he basically quit In that fight after the 1st round. Even the compubox had Calaghe scoring more.

Plus he dry humped him In front of Joe Cortez who's an American biased ****.

This content is protected