No Calzaghe Hopkins rematch!

I think there is probably a reason people don't try that. Calzaghe always fights back when buzzed, he's not eaxctly on the verge of being knocked out and contrary to what people believe they are worried about his "slaps", or rather the speed of them.

 

Utter shite that Hopkins was holding back and would let his hands go next time.

 

ive only ever seen calzaghe stunned a couple of times, as for jumping on him.... watch the mitchell fight

 

thats bullshite,

1. i have seen JCs fights if you look he lands with the scoring part of the glove
2 the only good punch that bhop landed was the one that put JC on his ass, the rest were either weak shots or ones which JC mocked
3 i feel that the fight was close, but i dont award points for holding and feigning injury

 

I can only assume that you haven't seen many of his fights. Byron Mitchell certainly landed more than one punch when he chased Calzaghe after the knockdown. Kessler also connected with several crisp cominations. As for the Bika fight, the vast majority who are headbutted above the eye are gonna look pretty marked up. Prior to this fight Joe had never been cut.

 

Nobody tried in 46 fights. Haha, seems like you know the answer. Tell you what, I'll train you and we'll follow your plan and coax him out of retirement. It seems like somebody has finally figured out how to knock him out. Amazing!

In all seriousness, there is a reason why he has never been sparked out. He has a good chin, excellent footwork and he has blazing hand-speed and fights back whenever in trouble. Oh, and he's an accurate puncher.

 

Actually I've been to see Joe fight live as a professional 8 times (including when he was still boxing at the Star leisure centre in Cardiff) and have seen him box countless times as an amateur on many amateur shows. I'm personal friends with one of his cornermen (Brian Coleman) and am on talking terms with Enzo Calzaghe too - so I've seen plenty of Joe Calzaghe thank you.
I was there for both the Mitchell and Kessler fights, and was even given entrance to the press only final conference before Calzaghe-Kessler.


People miss the point in what I'm saying. Yes Mitchell did jump on Joe, but for all the traits Mitchell posesses, he lacks the ring smarts and intelligence of a Bernard Hopkins. As I mentioned in a previous post, Hopkins wouldn't go steaming in stupidly. He would just make more of an effort to make Joe pay for his mistakes and look to do some damage this time around.
Joe has good qualities and Joe has bad qualities, but people seem to think he's an invincible superman. He, like any other fighter, has his vulnerabilities and if you have a man good enough and willing to do so, they can be exploited.

 

So a fighter has weaknesses. Incredible.

So does Hopkins, and they were exploited against Calzaghe. The reverse is also true, which is why it made for a scrappy and close fight.

People truely are delusional to think it would be anything other than same again. Hopkins overtrained. He didn't try hard enough. He should have done this, or that. I've heard it all, and none of it makes any sense, Hopkins is a smart man who knows what he is doing, he knows how to maximize his own potential on any given night against any opponent. He did the best he could do with Joe Calzaghe.

 

Ninebar - Thank you, don't see the need for insults mate, just shows ignorance and lack of self esteem.

I can understand Calzaghe-Hopkins II wouldn't be everbody's cup of tea, but I would like to see it. I enjoyed the first fight, and although Hopkins believes he won first time around, he knows that some of the judges don't see things the same way he does, and I genuinely believe - especially after his comments after the Pavlik fight - that he's willing to make the necessary adjustments. It is my opinion that Hopkins is capable of making those adjustments and has the tools to get the job done.
I take on board what you say about the accumulation and speed of Joe's "punches" (be they legally landed blows or not) having an effect, but I resort back to previous comments I made where I said most of them would land on Hopkins' arms and gloves. Hopkins is one of the hardest fighters out there to hit cleanly.
However, Joe is also exposed himself and I expect Hopkins to be intelligent and skilled enough to know when to unload and when not to.

 

I'm struggling to understand why BHOP didn't try his best last time against Calzaghe but would in a rematch.

 

A subtle difference in what I've said - or have tried to say, apologies if I've not been able to articulate myself correctly - is not so much Hopkins didn't try his best, he didn't perform at his best. There's a difference.

I feel Hopkins under-performed in their first fight relative to his own abilities. This could be for a number of reasons - one, I think, is he underestimated Joe a bit and although didn't take him lightly, went in a little bit too contented and over confident. Regardless, no room for excuses. What happened happened and that's that (even though I had Hopkins winning).
I think Bernard would be far more motivated second time around, and motivation can make a huge difference. First time around Joe fought a content Bernard Hopkins, if they were to meet again I believe he would be facing a highly motivated Executioner.

However, it looks like Joe isn't going to fight again anyway (unless his case with Warren goes belly up and he needs the cash!), and that's fair enough.
I wish him a long, happy and healthy retirement and thank him for what he has contributed to the sport. :thumbsup
I just don't believe he's as great as the hype makes out, and a lot of his "46 and 0" is smoke, mirrors and paper statistics. But there was some good too.
I just find it a bit of an insult when he's hailed as the "greatest British fighter ever", when he's not even the best out of Wales. Jimmy Wilde anyone?

 

GAZ i must say i disagree with you on most things you have said about JC but i do respect your opinion because you give reasons

 

:good Would be boring if we all agreed wouldn't it?

 

it would be lol