Like Hopkins said Joe knows the Judges

I have been enjoying the (relative) lack of Hopkins - Calzaghe threads today, let´s keep it that way.

 

What pisses me off most is how all the nuthuggers on here slag off Calzaghe but don't see the irony in what they are claiming is more apparent towards their own fighter. e.g. The Pavlik fans claiming Joe has never fought anybody good, but how can PAVLIK fan of all fans claim that, FFS.

 

Calzaghe beat hopkins, I had him 117-111 just like harold lederman from HBO,
The fight was dirty, Hopkins kept holding, Faked a low blow, Tried to get more rest time,
So why the **** should he fight him again?
If anything calzaghe would win more clearly.:good

 

:|

 

This post makes no sense. Calzaghe won the fight against Hopkins and people said Hopkins was old and washed up. Then Hopkins gives Pavlik a boxing lesson and Calzaghe kills two birds with 1 stone; 1) Hopkins proved he was not washed up by beating up on Pav., 2) All the the talk of Calz. ducking Pavlik was put to bed.........Hopkins then picks Jones to beat Calzaghe in their fight. The fight starts off well for Jones and Hopkins was probably thinking "told you so" after Jones bone to bone kd in round 1, but by the end of the round it's Calz. applying pressure and punches to Jones. Then Clazaghe, round by round, outboxes and outhustles Jones till Jones is spent right about the time he takes the nasty cut in round 7.

The Calzaghe who fought Jones was: more adjusted to LHW than he was against Hopkins. He was n oticibly more well toned, he moved better, punched sharper, and sat down on his punches more. The biggest difference between Hopkins and Jones, and why Jones took so much punishment, was that after Joe started to tire them both out, was Hopkins fought to spoil and survive where Jones fought to win and went out on his sword trying. Jones fought like a champ

So why do these guys need a rematch in Cardiff? It's plain to me that if they fought again, Calz. would come in more like he was against Jones, better conditioned and more accustomed to the weight, two things that what help him improve his performance. What would Hopkins do? Be more aggresive? That would be playing into Joe's hands and it would end up like the Jones fight. Add the likelyhood that the ref. in Cardiff would not let Hopkins get away with his BS tactics and you have a pretty bad scenario for Hopkins and Calz. would beat Hopkins worse than he beat Jones. So in the end if Calz. is going to fight again why would he waste it on Hopkins???

 

I believe Hopkins will take the big fights at lhw in 2009 and there won't be anybody with a pulse left at 175 except hopkins, and then Joe can retire a coward or fight hopkins again and probably get knocked out

 

Retired like a coward after what he has accomplished?
He beat hopkins,
Deal with it,
***,

 

I dont think the judges beat him. Its just that Hopkins has that champion mindstate that the challenger has to beat the champ convincigly(clear enough decision) to get the win, and he felt Joe didn't do that. I felt Joe won, but I knew and agreed that the decision would be controversial.

 

Yes, like a coward. Taylor beat him by the same margin and had as bad a fight as Calzaghe did, yet he had the courage to accept Hopkins' challenge again. Taylor showed this same courage when he rematched Pavlik.

If he is not willing to rematch close fights, then it's obviously because he is afraid of losing- therefor, a coward.

 

Pretty much, basically.

 

You guys are really spinning your wheels trying to come to terms with the whole situation