Roach has no complaints about calzaghe winning

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by mstar, Apr 21, 2008.


Page 2 of 5
  1. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    It's not amatuer boxing rules.

    I'd rather be blind.
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #16
  2. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    I agree, the entire fight was dictated at hopkins is pace, he controlled that fight. He boxed on the back foot and got punished for it. Which is wrong.

    Of course calzaghe had his moments. The rounds were close. I just thought the quality came from hopkins...although towards the end that wasn't the case, because his output lessoned.
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #17
  3. mstar

    mstar Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,943
    318
    Jun 5, 2005
    Cobbler god post mate.

    Fair enough hopkins had joe all over the place in rounds 1,2 but joe adjusted and started to neutralise bhops attacks and make no mistake joe is underrated inside. Bhop thought he could beat joe inside but on a lot of occaisions joe was able to beat him inside simply becuase of his fast hands and experience of fighting inside. I pointed this out in my prediction for the fight that joe can Mix it with anyone inside and he can adapt to those tactics if needed, that was the key i think look at the fight normally you find bhop VERY active inside but as joe had lots of stamina he was firing away inside and bhop had to counter this and fire more then he normally wanted and therefore got tired with the pace.

    check the boxing stats people they don't lie, scoring punches count so doesn't matter if they have little power or not
     
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    #18
  4. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    Didn't you think at the beginning of the fight bhop beat joe to the punch and was just as fast?

    Just a question.
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #19
  5. LiamE

    LiamE Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,391
    3
    Nov 3, 2007
    Yup he was beating Joe to the punch for a while.
     
    LiamE, Apr 21, 2008
    LiamE, Apr 21, 2008
    #20
  6. BOOKA

    BOOKA Member Full Member

    272
    0
    Jun 7, 2005
    The more aggressive fighter needs to get some sort of credit from judges because they are taking more risks, and if either fighter comes forward then you have no fight.

    Imagine Hopkins vs Hopkins, it doesnt bare thinking about howterrible that would be
     
    BOOKA, Apr 21, 2008
    BOOKA, Apr 21, 2008
    #21
  7. mstar

    mstar Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,943
    318
    Jun 5, 2005
    Dude no it was timing that beat joe and joes stance which he didn't adjust quick enough from the start of the fight. i think the first and second round joe was a little in "how do i figure out his style and adjust" and yes bhop seem to be able to fire awa
     
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    #22
  8. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    The only thing that was a major suprise to me, and the only thing I think I really underrated about Hopkins was the speed of his punch relative to Calzaghe while he was fresh.
     
    Cobbler, Apr 21, 2008
    Cobbler, Apr 21, 2008
    #23
  9. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    Yeh, but you should look at the work the boxer on the backfoot is doing too. Like cotto Vs mosley, people thought he got on his bike, but cotto was actually boxing really well.

    Yes, the aggressior should get some credit, but not if what he's doing amounts to nothing and the quality is coming from the boxer who is countering him, setting the pace, being the general of the ring.

    Being a ring general doesn't equal to being in the centre either.


    I like techincal fights. I'd watch it.:good
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #24
  10. mstar

    mstar Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,943
    318
    Jun 5, 2005
    Cobbler i looked at the fight just now before posting... my take on it is that Bhop just had good instints and timing then the speed factor but sure i think your right in saying the surprise was that hopkins is NOT slow punching wise, he can still beat many many younger fighters to the punch.
     
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    #25
  11. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    I thought they'd give the decision to bhop until i saw frank warren smiling like he'd been blown.

    I didn't think calzaghe's corner thought he had won.
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #26
  12. mstar

    mstar Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,943
    318
    Jun 5, 2005
    BOOKA thats bang on right on the money. the aggressive fighter needs to get some credit as they are risking more, and hence why judges reward close rounds to the agressor.
     
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    mstar, Apr 21, 2008
    #27
  13. Drusome

    Drusome Member Full Member

    368
    13
    Jul 19, 2004
    Calzaghe landed a number of nice stiff straight lefts and clean jabs too.
     
    Drusome, Apr 21, 2008
    Drusome, Apr 21, 2008
    #28
  14. Dude

    Dude lost my car Full Member

    1,460
    0
    Mar 23, 2005
    Yes i know, but during some of the rounds he landed alot of pitter patter shots and had no quality or very little. Yet he was given the round because he was the aggressor.
     
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    Dude, Apr 21, 2008
    #29
  15. mattress

    mattress Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,030
    2
    Apr 8, 2007
    Whereas Hopkins should have got them for landing one decent shot, backpeddling and hugging???? Get real, get over it and move on.
     
    mattress, Apr 21, 2008
    mattress, Apr 21, 2008
    #30
Page 2 of 5