Just watched calzaghe v hopkins again..

How many clean punches did calzaghie land through the first 7 rounds? I think i can count on one hand maybe two if im being generous.

 

Brilliant post.

Based on how badly hopkins faded against Calzaghe I thought age had finally caught up with him and pavlik would stop him. In hindsight, Calzaghe made hopkins look like that (though Joe looked like **** in the process)

 

I thought Hopkins won.

Although he didn't look good doing it and certainly did fade a bit. But he won a lot of early and mid rounds and I thought he just edged it.

 

It was a very odd fight. Calzaghe throwing lots of punches that didn't land clean, but were effective in tiring Hopkins, making him fight dirty etc. While Hopkins landed the cleaner, harder, shots, but, knockdown aside, weren't very effective.

I can handle people thinking either fighter won because it was a truly bizarre fight.

 

That's the irony of it all, really- both men looked far from their best in that fight, only to look great in the fights immediately before and after it. Sometimes great fighters look terrible against each other, and I think Calzaghe-Hopkins was a textbook example of it. Heck, Freddie Roach was coming out publicly imploring Hopkins to retire rather than face Pavlik because he was worried about Bernard's health. At the time there was a real concern about Hopkins choice to lure Kelly up to fight him; I also thought Pavlik would wear down Hopkins late for a stoppage because I thought Hopkins' conditioning was shot.

 

Hopkins won clearly by 7:3 with an extra point for the Knockdown.

It's disgusting for boxing to think that someone like Calzaghe could have won that fight.

 

I gave Hopkins 4 rounds, 3 of the first 4 and the 10th, so with the KD that was 115-112 Calzaghe.

According to the HBO statistics Calzaghe landed twice as many punches as Hopkins in the first 4 rounds and had a slightly higher connect percentage but because he was landing the better shots I gave most of those rounds to Hopkins, as did most people who watched it.

The point I'm trying to make is that Hopkins was winning rounds for landing the cleaner more effective shots when he was landing them. If the first 4 rounds were scored on the basis of workrate and punch volume Calzaghe would have won them too. Hopkins done **** all for the rest of the fight until after he pulled his ***** move in the 10th to get a breather.

 

116-112 for Calzaghe. I lost alot of respect for Hopkins in the post fight conference, he thinks acting like a ***** and running/grabbing and attempting to headbutt 24/7 is schooling a fighter? he is a ****ing sore loser and always has been. I understand if people scored a draw, but a win for Hopkins is off the mark imo. Hopkins should have just admitted that he couldnt figure Calzaghe out and resorted to spoiling and landing a few crisp right hands to win him the fight. Guess what Bernard, that isnt enough to win a 12 round fight. Having said that, Bernard always comes across as a decent guy with alot of other interviews so i reserve full judgement on his personality, and he is an amazing boxing athlete.

 

calzaghe won it due to his ability to get off alot of alot shots but you also have to take into account hopkins age. hopkins while still an elite fighter, was still somewhat past it. hopkins domination of pavlik has alot to do with hopkins exposing pavlik weaknesses.

 

You dont just score a fight on that. Well maybe you do, but thats not how they are scored.

 

you watched the whole thing twice?!?!?! Wtf is wrong with you, id rather jerk off with sand paper

 

Gave it to Calzaghe by the closest of margins. Have no pronlems with anyone who thought Hopkins won. His tactics were pretty poor imo however. Roach had some interesting things to say about the match I recall.