Joe Calzaghe's 23 PUNCH Combo

You can't say "take away X and Y" because they help make the resume, man. That's like saying, "Take away tomato sauce and cheese, and that pizza ain't ****."

I will give you that Hopkins had plenty of subpar defenses that had no business getting televised on HBO. But again, when the opportunity rose to fight the best, he did. For argument's sake, let's look at all the guys Hopkins FOUGHT that were undoubtedly Top 10 P4P or would become Top 10 P4P in the future (Even if he didn't win, it shows he's willing to take on the challenge, which is what great fighters do):

HOPKINS VS. PAST/PRESENT/FUTURE TOP 10 P4P
1. Roy Jones (L)
2. Glen Johnson (W)
3. Felix Trinidad (W)
4. Oscar De La Hoya (W)
5. Jermain Taylor (L, L)
6. Antonio Tarver (W)
7. Winky Wright (W)
8. Joe Calzaghe (L)

Now CALZAGHE VS. PAST/PRESENT/FUTURE TOP 10 P4P
1. Bernard Hopkins (W)


I rest my case.

 

No. He fought as well as he could. You are just disregarding Hopkins effort.

 

No. Hopkins fought a very good fight. Calzaghe though should have boxed instead of trying to recklessly push the pace.

The fight was pretty awful to watch anyways.

 

Yeah, shitty stoppage.

Manfredo was well on the way to a clear victory.

 

Where is the famous 'adaptability' that we always here about? No, on that night, Joe did the best he could against the game plan Hopkins came in with. It was good enough for the decision. And "recklessly push the pace" IS the game plan that one him the fight.

 

that wasnt boxing
that was slapping

 

I dont think Johnson or Tarver should be top 10 P4P ut thats my view. But yes he has fought more top 10 P4P fighters than Joe im not disputing that but..... he lost to 3 of the 8 he fought, he made Winky step up to 170 when his best fighting weight was 154/160, again DLH had no buisness being at 160, and Taylor whilst a good fighter isnt exactly great.

Im not saying Hopkins is **** or anything like that, he is a bonafide hall of famer, but people seem to gloss over his record.

Calzaghe if he had any balls should have ****ed off Warren years ago then he probably would have got the fights he wanted. His record is pretty solid with some awful defences, some good defences and some great defences.

Eubank, Reid, Lacy, Kessler, Mitchell, Brewer and ofcourse Hopkins are all good wins.

 

Well whatever man, look at the middle rounds and Calzaghe settled down and outboxed Borenard.

On a second note where was Cortez deducting a point from Hopkins like he did Hatton?

Hopkins fought for self preservation, as he has done for the last 5 years, being 99% defensive for a whole fight dont win you the fight.

 

The original point was you didn't think Cal was at his best. I disagree. None of this matters to that point. He didn't impose his will, that is 'his best', because Bhop didn't allow it. Hence, styles make fights.

 

I agree with you to a point but that is like me fighting Tyson, running around the ring for 4 rounds (it would be a four rounder because i couldnt run for 12) and him winning on points but me saying he didnt impose his will because i didnt allow him to.

Hopkins fought a perfect survival fight, he didnt fight to win just for self preservation.

Im not actually a big Calzaghe fan, but he is very underated by the Yanks.

 

He'd have stopped Winky Wright in every fight of his career.

 

He circled a little and held on the inside.

 

WAS the referee fired and banned forever? Does anyone know? Surely he didn't get away with stopping that and not be punished severely.

 

Calzaghe's punches are so ugly. Jim Lampley said "Calzaghe's boxing is like jazz music".

:roll:

 

Yuu darned right, it is.



He slaps as fast as he can, and has about as much power behind those slaps as my 90 year old grandmother would have.


I HATE that kind of fighter, and it is, for some reason, infuriating to see him have so much success and media attention. :twisted:

I can't STAND that kind of fighter. (term used loosely)

KNOCK HIM OUT, ROY!