He won at least 8 rounds against Hopkins, most of them with little trouble and dominated the last part of the fight. Considering Calzaghe's age, it was a brilliant win. He was totally flat against Reid and was totally frustrated against Salem. Calzaghe is like Lennox Lewis: his most impressive wins are against his most dangerous opponents.
I feel confident of the reason, just like I'm confident of my pick tonight, as well as everything else I've done in my time here. How about yourself? I'm speaking from an EMPOWERED position, that's the ****ing difference. You want to put something on the table? Bull**** is for free.
So he went from having the greatest preformance of his career against Lacy who was his "greatest opponent" to date then less then 2 years later he is washed up because Kessler took 4 rounds off of him??? And then 5 months after that his ability was even more eroded because he looked like dog **** vs Hopkins??? You know what you guys are wrong. Calzaghe hasn't been in his prime since 99 when he barley beat(i think he lost) to Robin Reid and then looked like **** vs David Starie.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl Easily? Boy I can see why Rafael is having a hard time talking to you fools. If Calzaghe won 8 rounds, which is easily debateable, they were razor thin, as to why 2 out of the 3 major boxing publications scoring the fight that night, BBC and ESPN gave the fight to Hopkins. You see to us who score boxing the way its supposed to be scored, what Calzaghe was doing is not considered Clean Effective Punching. So for every 12 slaps that Calzaghe landed, I'd rather score the clean right that hopkins landed. I had Calzaghe winning by 2 to 3 rounds. Mainly because Hopkins didnt do anything. nothing whatsoever to what Calzaghe did. Taylor beat Hopkins more decisively then Calzaghe.
So suddenly he's gone from looking more impressive against "Euro-bums" to losing to Robin Reid?! It'd be nice if you could maintain the same line within at least a thread! Get your story straight!
Taylor never beat Hopkins, so there's no way he could have beaten him more decisively than Calzaghe did. As for taking people seriously, you're the one arguing that Hopkins gave away the fight for no reason. That's a pretty impressive conspiracy theory.
Actually you are right he did look worse vs a prime Reid(in a fight he lost) then he did vs a 43 year old Hopkins. But you know what..... Styles make fights. The only good fighters Calzaghe fought in there prime was Reid who IMO he lost to. Lacy great preformance but since you wanna look at what Hopkins is doing after his fight with Calzaghe lets look at Lacy's....... WIn doesn't look so good now does it??? Kessler. Joe didn't look great because he was past his prime it was because Kessler is GOOD!!!!!!!!
So you admit you changed your opinion totally when I pointed out the facts? Good. Now you can continue the lesson by learning this fact: Calzaghe has the kind of style that doesn't age well. He's like RJJ in this respect. He relies a lot on natural talent. That's why he aged more quickly than, say, Hopkins who relies on skill and strength, which are two attributes that almost never fade.
us ****s make dicks like you stand to attention. for somenoe who is generically right you would do well to stop talking out of your arse and give your mouth a chance.:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Uh Taylore beat hopkins twice. atsch Secondly, I never said Hopkins gave the fight away to Calzaghe. I said Calzaghe looked horrible against hopkins, and the only thing that saved him was his work rate, mostly due to the fact he doesnt throw punches. :rofl
At least 8???:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl And don't even compare Calzaghe to a ATG Champion like Lennox Lewis.