The Joe Calzaghe Deception, the night Bernard Hopkins was robbed

Joe Calzaghe beat Bernard Hopkins fair and square in Hopkins home country, very good away win by Calzaghe.

 

why do people still rant on about this fight,you can watch it ten times and to a neutral joe wins every time.joe fans see joe winning easy and hopkins fans always see hopkins pipping it. joe won fair and square end of. get over it.

 

This is the most biased boxing analysis on youtube. Bruceblitz, the guy who made this, wants to brainwash boxing fans. He's even blocked me from posting on the videos because I can expose his biased crap.

The videos heavily favour Hopkins. All the good work from Hopkins gets highlighted and replayed several times. All Calzaghe's bad work gets highlighted and replayed several times.

So much of Calzaghe's best work is not acknowledged. Hopkins is given rounds that Calzaghe won.

These videos only discuss punches thrown. To analyse it properly you need to discuss every aspect of each fighters performance.

 

I think post retirement people are starting to realise just how good Calzaghe was. How many people have you seen in the ring with BHOP that were able to keep him going backwards for virtually the whole fight (running!)?

Calzaghe had BHOP in so much distress that he he tried to fake a low blow and at the end of some rounds he did not even know where his own corner was (according to F. Roach).

If that fight was an old school 15 rounder BHOP would have got stopped the guy was fading badly.

 

Somebody has created a new account to post these videos.

This is clearly the work of Bobsinno/Cowardzaghe: the freak who devotes his life to slating Calzaghe on Youtube.

He can't handle the fact that Hopkins wasn't shot when Joe beat him. 43-years-old yes, but not shot. Last nights performance against Pascal proved how much Hopkins had left.

 

I scored it for Hopkins at the time by a couple of points.

I'm not giving Calzaghe credit for supposedly landing a lot of punches on Hopkins, because very few of them were effective punches. This is not like Mayweather landing x amount of punches on Gatti!

Calzaghe showed some skill in dealing with Hopkins but was still made to look amateurish. The differences in scoring are down to the amount of credit people are willing to give Calzaghe for crowding Hopkins with cuffing punches that mostly don't land.

Hopkins was unable to fight his preferred fight due to Calzaghe's persistence and ruggedness, and the faking of low blows was bad form - but that doesn't come into the scoring. There is absolutely no chance that Calzaghe would have stopped him had there been more time - Hopkins was competitive in the last rounds and Joe was still landing not much of anything. And heck Roy Jones went the distance in a much worse situation.

In terms of the four criteria I gave Hopkins the nod for clean and hard punching, and defense whereas Calzaghe won out on ring generalship as the fight wore on. Effective aggression is a close one because Calzaghe gave Hopkins problems coming forward, but was also counter-punched plenty and didn't show much quality in what he landed.

It wasn't either man's finest hour, but I stand by the fact that this was a very debatable decision.

 

Calzaghe was an excellent combination puncher before he damaged his hands, Calzaghe was never a one punch merchant but would stop opponents with combos all the time back in the day.
Calzaghes will to win and ringmanship were second to none, it would be very difficult for any boxer to beat Calzaghe with the skillset he had.

 

Never mind effective, they were not even legal, scoring shots!

Anyway, I think that we can establish now that if it's a close fight Hopkins will not win.

 

Joe Calzaghe and Bernard Hopkins was a great fight, you have to acknowledge the greatness of BOTH fighters, this is a fight which will be looked back on, it was perhaps bigger than we imagined it to be. Calzaghe is disliked by Boxing purists but he was unique. Floyd Mayweather Jr stated that Calzaghe's adaptability, intelligence and speed made him the only man on the planet to come close to himself, and it's not often ANYONE gets recognition from a Mayweather let alone that sort of accolade. Hopkins is a legend, no doubt but you have to look at what Calzaghe did that night objectively and hold your hands up that he is unique, a different animal and a legend himself. I think we all know that if Joe Calzaghe's hands weren't so brittle he could have achieved so much more. Imagine Joe C had zero hand problems and faced Hopkins 100%, he'd have beaten Bernard far more convincingly in Vegas, Calzaghe underachieved which is saying something IMO.

Look at B-Hops fitness/stamina against Pascal V the Calzaghe fight and ask yourself why Joe C would need or want to retire ......... the answer is that his hands couldn't take anymore, he couldn't sit-down on his punches which is a major loss to the Sport.

Two great fighters for me.

 

114-113 Hopkins

 

I honestly think Hopkins completley under estimated Calzaghe and came to take the **** and thought it would be easy.

Look at the difference between Hopkins performances in

Hopkins vs Calzaghe and Hopkins vs Pavlik
Hopkins vs Antwun Echols I, and Hopkins vs Antwun Echols II
Hopkins vs Eastman, and Hopkins vs Taylor
Hopkins vs RJJ II, and Hopkins vs Pascal

There is a big difference between a motivated Hopkins and the one that just takes the **** such as the RJJ II and Calzaghe versions.

Hopkins pressed the action for full 12 rounds vs Pascal, got clipped on the back of the head but continued fighting to the last bell without showing signs of tiredness.

Against RJJ he got tapped at the back of the head and started taking the **** by buying time.

When Calzaghe saw what happend to Pavlik, he knew a rematch would be too risky so played it safe and left the game.

I thought Hopkins beat Calzaghe 114 - 113, but it was BHops own fault for making the fight so close, he had Calzaghe schooled with straight lead rights but didnt seem he had put in the work at training camp.

 

Yet the haters fail to even recognise this obvious and impressive feat. Hopkins is undeniably one of the greatest fighters of our generation and at his grand old age he still leaves most fans open-mouthed. He has made fools of some fighters that people did not give him a chance against - he is a freak of nature and his kind is rarely seen.

With this is mind, how can the JC haters, who cannot deny that their fight was a close affair, rob Calzaghe of their respect and dismiss his ability after all that Hopkins has achieved...and more importantly, achieved since?:huh

 

Bull****. One thing that Hopkins never does is scrimp on training. The guy never comes unprepared and he underestimates no-one, regardless of his bravado.

 

hopkins couldnt press the action because joe controlled the centre of the ring and set a high pace that hopkins couldnt deal with, making hopkins burn up a hell of alot of energy in the first half of the fight.

calzaghe should be acknowledged for that.

 

LOL that had to be the worst analysis I have ever come across, so biased it was unreal!
Face it calzaghe won the fight, hopkins didnt help himself acting like a ***** during the fight aswell!
Move on...hopkins lost to the white boy, and that white boy then beat hopkins enemy next and retired undefeated and one of the great british boxers of all time !
CASE CLOSED !