The argument for a Bernard Hopkins win

The build up to this fight has been different to any previous Calzaghe fight I can remember. The reasons are many: fighting outside of Europe for the first time, fighting at a different weight for the first time, fighting an older man for a change, none of his belts on the line etc etc... But the one aspect that could make all the difference is the intelligence (in the ring) of his opponent. I don't think anybody else has brought the ring smarts to the table that Hopkins will bring come Saturday week. Defensively, Hopkins is better than Calzaghe's best victims, much better. Hopkins counterpunching ability allied to this defence, in combination with Joe's sometimes ragged and open southpaw style make Calzaghe a sitting duck for a booming right hand straight on the button. Joe normally doesn't worry too much if he misses a few punches in his combinations (see the Manfredo finish - he missed them all), he simply continues with his unrelenting output... a barrage which has seen him "stop" his opponents by overwhelming them. Some call it conning the ref - regardless, it's always been Calzaghe's style and his intentions are to throw as many punches as possible, not to sit there and pick the right one.

In Las Vegas, it's supposed to be a proper fighters venue where fights don't get stopped until the very last moment and referees won't tolerate slapping. Let's hope Calzaghe refrains from the latter punching technique and sticks to what he did in the Kessler and Lacy fights.

Frank Warren has kept Calzaghe under close tabs for a lot of years, letting him fight boxers everyone knew he would beat. Only once in the whole time that Joe has been WBO champion has he started as underdog in a fight: against Jeff Lacy. If you look back at the reasons why Lacy was favourite, it was as much that Calzaghe looked awful in encounters with Evans Ashira (labouring, limping to a dull 12 round decision) and Kabary Salem (getting dropped and roughed up by nothing more than a journeyman) than Lacy was looking impressive. Everyone involved in the UK knew that Calzaghe looks his best against come forward, aggressive fighters when Joe is properly prepared. Joe was properly prepared and Lacy happened to be one paced. All very good. But see what happens when boxers leave the initiative to Calzaghe - David Starie, Jimenez, Robin Reid - Joe looks less than stellar... in fact, in those fights he looked distinctly average. He's fighting arguably the best boxer in the world at setting traps for boxers just like Calzaghe to barge straight into with wide eyed gumption. Joe has been floored twice before due to his open attacking style and being caught without seeing it coming. The intriguing thing is that this is what Hopkins is brilliant at - countering accurately with a single shot. Nobody has outboxed Joe or got anywhere near to establishing the upper hand with a jab so this will be a waste of time if Hopkins tries it. So he won't (find the compubox numbers for how many jabs Hopkins threw in the Wright (southpaw) fight). Hopkins wants JC to try and control the fight, he wants him to take risks, to dive in and launch flurries. Tactically, if Joe is unable to bully Hopkins by throwing him off balance, giving him a chance to land and crucially, if Hopkins isn't drawn into a slugging match (highly unlikely) then he has the perfect game to end Calzaghe's winning record.

A high paced fight results in a Calzaghe win, probably by stoppage. A slow paced fight as a result of Hopkins repeatedly landing the right hand when Joe gets too close takes away everything good about Calzaghe - the combinations, the handspeed, the power, the fitness and stamina. Then what we have left is a broken man with nothing left to do than desperately try to stop the contest - this is further bad news and could end in an embarrasing defeat.

 

The reason for this post: During the build up to most JC fights (especially the Kessler one), I got more and more convinced that Joe was going to emerge victorious. This time, the closer to the fight we've come, the more I can see the argument for a Hopkins win.

That's not to say my prediction has changed though.

 

What were your scores for the two Taylor fights?

I'm not peeing my pants, I just think this fight could potentially be far more interesting than you think.

 

I know you're not under-estimating Hopkins but I think you are over-estimating Calzaghe's ability to box well against defensive fighters. There hasn't been too many of them on his resume for a reason... he looks **** against them and they're always boring fights where Joe has done just enough to win and not a lot else... What I'm saying is that he has struggled to break down the likes of Jimenez and Starie before and Hopkins is a lot better. Sure, Joe has also improved but it's an undeniable fact that there are question marks regarding his handling of boxers who like to sit on the back foot.