Joe Calzaghe doesnt get enough credit for the Hopkins win

I don't like Hopkins. Biggest problem for Calzaghe here is, that he didn't won the fight. Calzaghe simply didn't conect........

 

Calzaghe clearly defeated Hopkins, and I like both fighters. Hopkins was outclassed, even though he used every trick in his book. It probably would have looked a lot different had Hopkins been younger, but I think Calzaghe still wins (Joe was 36 at the time and beyond his own prime; Hopkins was 43).

Hopkins simply couldn't keep up with Calzaghe and was overwhelmed. Simply put, Joe wore Bernard's ass out with volume and pace, as well as with his unorthodox style.

And, as mentioned by another poster, Calzaghe moved up in weight and went to the US to fight Hopkins. Despite these considerations, Calzaghe handily beat the Philly vet.

Joe actually "solved" BHop faster than he solved Kessler. It took Joe two rounds to figure out Hopkins, I think it took him 4 to figure out Kessler. After that, it was Calzaghe Time and Hopkins had little chance.

Calz landed like 26 more overall shots than Jones had on Hopkins (RJJ was the person who had previously held the record for most shots landed on BHop in a fight). That helps to demonstrate just how good Joe was against BHop.

Hopkins still had plenty left after the fight, as Pavlik and Pascal can attest. Just not against Calzaghe.

 

Exactly .

 

Looking at his **** poor resume, he needs all the credit in the world for this fight or else he would be forgotten quicker.

 

:yep Thats because he lost the fight.

 

Anybody who doesn't give credit for that fight is exposing themselves as a hater. Even if you think Hopkins won, it was clearly very close & for that alone Calzaghe deserves credit because Hopkins is/was a truely great boxer.

 

You probably gave Williams the Martinez fight, right ?

 

Effective punching you're correct, but you can't win a fight where you were out punched for the majority of the fight. Defense, yes, but you don't win a fight just because your defense was better especially when you use spoiling/underhanded tactics to make it better. Ring IQ? This is debateable, as neither man had it his own way for very long.

Both men looked bad and the fight was awful to watch. Calzaghe won because he outworked Hopkins all night.

 

People always use the "faking low blows" line when defending Calzaghe's win against Hopkins. The man was hit low - whether or not he acted more hurt than he was is irrelevant as far as the scoring is concerned. Hopkins actually won that round pretty clearly anyway (round 10). It just rationalisation from Calzaghe fans, plain and simple. Calzaghe didn't land any significant punches in the whole fight - the punch stats were bull**** (I think he was meant to have landed around 250 punches on Hopkins). The only clear Calzaghe round was 11.

 

A scoring puch has to be delivered with sufficient force - Calzaghe barely landed anything. By "outworking" you mean "threw more punches", but you don't get points for trying to land. Hopkins was tagging him all night - don't forget he only needs 6 rounds, due to the knockdown, and he obviously won 1 and 2, so only needs four after that.

 

Calzaghe beat a prime hopkins but americans keep claiming he was old and past his best- yes old but not out of his prime

 

He sure does! That's pretty much what his legacy is held together by. All of his other wins aren't anything compared to his win against Nard! That win solidified him has a great!

 

As a brit i also thought he had lost, he was pretty crap that night, even his dad thought he lost going by what he was saying to him in the last few rounds, and while yes he would gee him up any way, that was real ****ing concern in there from memory

 

Round 10 was still up for grabs when the tiring Hopkins was hit low. In need of a breather, he took the full break, during which time the dumber Calzaghe was playing to the crowd and lost focus. Sneaky **** Hopkins then stole the round.

 

I'm not sure you understand: The fight wasn't remotely close. Even Harold Lederman had it right: 9-3 rounds for Calzaghe, with a point off for suffering the Round 1 knockdown. That score is 116-111 for Calzaghe. One judge had it this way, another 115-112 (8-4 rounds for Calz). That's about right, with the other judge being a "what-was-she-watching?" outlier.

Hopkins won 1 round between rounds 4-12. He got punked after round 3. He did what he could do early, much as Kessler did against Joe. After that, BHop got worked as Joe "solved" him and Joe settled into his rhythm. And again, I like Hopkins.

The only round Hopkins did well in as the fight wore on was the 10th (Lederman gave him the 7th by virtue of one right hand at the end of the round; I can't see that, at all, as Hopkins was outlanded in the round by a margin of 2-1. None of the announcers seemed to agree with Lederman on the round, either). Not coincidentally, that was the round Hop took however many minutes to recover from the devastating (lol) Calz low blow.

In other words, Hopkins ran out of gas as Joe turned the heat up. Not a surprise, as Roy Jones or others can attest. Fighting Joe isn't like fighting other guys; the pressure he puts on you, combined with his speed and ability to adapt, just breaks guys.

Hopkins got broke, even though he gave his best and showed in more recent fights he was far from done when he fought Joe Calz.

The fight was essentially non-competitive after the third round, except for a brief moment here or there.