Just seen an interview with Nazim Richardson questioning Calzaghe's credibility + bigging up BHop's. "When you look at Bernard's record you look who he beat and then ask who did he beat, like Bernard beats Tarver you ask who Tarver beat - RJJ, who did RJJ beat and so on." He came out with a couple more then said you look at Kessler and Lacy and there's nothing on their record. I've got a few different ones for your selective memory Nazim. Who beat Calzaghe - nobody Who beat Hopkin's - RJJ - Glen Johnson beat RJJ + lost to Omar Sheika who Calzaghe beat JT beat BHop - Let's be honest little Cory Spinks beat JT Calzaghe beat Eubank who Beat Benn who beat Barkley + McClellan. If Richardson really believes his one eyed biased bull**** he could be in for a shock.
The Pirate is an intelligent, cunning man. I have a lot of time for him. This is not what struck me about the interview. Instead, it was that he called the Calzaghe camp's bluff - yeah, you are goading Hopkins to come forward and fight, because it suits you, but why should he? He won't! He'll stink the joint up all night, if that's what it takes to survive and possibly win. He's right, of course. [yt]Ct9XtOX7_hY[/yt]
We've already covered this in great detail. It all depends on how convincing you find 1st grade logic. http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=56667&highlight=Craziest
Why are you disrespecting the guy? Inbred fool. He gave a good interview. Yes, I do disagree with the approach. I don't believe in ever comparing fights in that way (A beats B, B beats C, so A beats C) it simply doesn't work like that.
