in the uk press interview with freedie roach after the fight: Freddie Roach, Hopkins's classy trainer, did not buy the suggestions of one reporter that the judges would have been swayed by the pro-Wales crowd in the US, saying it was Calzaghe's aggression that was probably winning the vital rounds and therefore enough rounds to win "If you have a close, close round you normally give it to the aggressor,” Roach said. “I thought Bernard landed some good counter-punches on the inside, but they got smothered and weren’t really noticeable. I was telling him to press the issue more, but he was not able to do that. I’d love to see him retire. He’s had a great career.He has nothing to be ashamed of.” which is consistant with how manny nicked a few rounds against JMM as manny was the agressor
This is the kind of quality advice that you just don't get unless you've got a dream team in your corner.
well i think the judges and a ATG trainer probably know a little more about what scores useless or not he came forward and commited himself and looking at close fights those fighters always get the benefit of a decision and rightly so in my books (i am not a calzaghe fan just a boxing fan)
cobbler don't you think its intresting roach was telling bhop to do it, but bhop just remained the same, probably shows that roach knew it was tooo close and slipping away
Better punches>mindless agression. I'm just saying it's all well and good coming forward, but it's pointless if your moving forward and not making your aggression count. Much like Calzaghe in a few rounds. By that thinking, it's like saying Hatton won the close rounds against mayweather because he moved forward, even though mayweather was doing the quality work.
yet they were still landing whilst hopkins offered very little in reply. as the fight wore on calzaghe took hopkins right hand away, it was game over once he worked it out.
doesn't matter they all score if they land. thats the rules, if you don't like them then you can always see UFC etc
from the middle rounds onwards only one of them was controlling the pace, the white boy. whether they were "useless" or not, they were landing and scoring, end of ****ing story. bernard got outhustled and had to resort to ***** tactics.
People keep saying this, but what do they actually mean? http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ring_generalship How did Hopkins do this? He couldn't cope with the situations that came up. Calzaghe adapted his style from about the third or fourth round and neutralised the successes that Hopkins was having, Hopkins was incapable of doing the same in return. Calzaghe forced Hopkins (if he wanted to win the fight) to adopt a style of boxing that was not ideal for him and Hopkins couldn't do it. Calzaghe held the centre of the ring and dictated that the pace of the fight was too much for Hopkins. Where did you see Hopkin's ring generalship? And if someone was the 'general' in a fight, why would that person need to resort to feigning injury just to try to grab a break?
Of course. I think he also knew that his man had little else left to produce and that he would be stopped if he tried to go for broke.
Okay, but for every pitter patter shots he threw, hopkins threw one or two good shots. I'd take one or to good shots over pitter patter. I'll give you that, calzaghe came on strong in the end, and bhop didn't do much.