The love given to Hopkins and the hate given to Calzaghe

Posts like this are so pointless..... this is nothing more then boxrec w/ commentary....


You fail to see what Tito and DLH were closer to Hops weight then to Calzaghe's. But this OP is just whining....

 

The only ways to win a Ring championship is if you:
1. Beat the reigning champ
2. By unifying all three "major" sanctioning body belts in a division
3. A box-off between the #1 ranked and #2 ranked
4. If that is not possible, then between #1 ranked and #3 ranked.

In 2001, the ring LHW title was reintroduced, in 2001, Roy Jones Jr who was #1 ranked beat #3 ranked Eric Harding. So he was qualified to fill in the vacant title. Also he held the WBC, WBA, and IBF belts so he was the rightful Ring LHW champ.

He lost the belt to Tarver. Who lost it to Glen Johnson. Who lost it to Tarver. Who lost it to Hopkins. Who lost it to Calzaghe. Who retired, so the belt is now vacant.

Dariusz was #2 ranked and had the WBO title only, while Roy had the other 3 belts in the division.

The Ring is the most reliable source in boxing, and Calzaghe wasn't considered much by the Ring until 2006 9 years after becoming champ. While Hopkins was in P4P top 10 in 1999, 3 years after becoming champ.

Calzaghe highest ranking #3 came 11 years after he won the WBO SMW title, while BHop was ranked #1 6 years after becoming IBF MW champ.

Calzaghe in Britain wasn't as big Hamed, or Lennox.

Look at the P4P top 10 from 1997 - 2005, Calzaghe deserved to be outside the top 10, he wasnt as worthy as Tszyu, Judah, Morales, Lennox, Corrales, Toney and so on.

Calzaghe only was taken serious in 2007 when he beat Kessler before that he was considered a nobody by the Ring, and most the boxing world.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

It's not as if Hopkins is universally loved though. I guess I just don't understand threads like this. Both guys have their fans and haters. And I doubt Hopkins is as loved in Wales as Calzaghe is.

 

You've mentioned that Johnson was unbeaten several times in this thread but failed to mention that he had one of the most padded records in the history of boxing going into the Hopkins fight.

Less than a year before he fought Hopkins he fought a guy with 49 losses and only 14 wins. His fight immediately before Hopkins was against a guy with only 10 pro fights and he'd lost two of those, in between those two he fought someone with a 7-15-1 record.

Could you honestly imagine the abuse Calzaghe would have got if he'd fought him but people act as though it's a great scalp for Hopkins.

Kessler has lost once since he fought Calzaghe and was an unbeaten unified champ who'd fought sopme of the best in his division going into that fight. Johnson has lost twelve times since fighting Hopkins and only around 5 of his 30 or so opponents had more wins than losses before he fought Hopkins.

Johnson was a good win but the Kessler win is tainted? What was it you said:

"If your giving facts about thing, at least give the 'real' facts, and not ones that make your argument look better".

 

Even if Dariusz was the Ring Champ, he would still have to fight the #1 or he would have been stripped, so u saying "thats why I question it a bit" is invalid.

The ring is a better source than Boxrec.

 

Abuse Calzaghe would have gotten for what? Shutting out a guy who would go on to become a light heavyweight champ, and who gave a current P4P entrant in Chad Dawson absolute hell when he was already past his physical prime?

Don't tell me you aren't tired of defending guys like Tocker Pudwill and Richie Woodhall. Say what you want about Glen's "padded" record and "losses", but the reason people view that as an impressive win for Hopkins is because it is one.

This is the reason you take challenging fights in your prime against good fighters. Their value comes into focus over time. Calzaghe spent much of his prime beating up nobodies, and the price he pays (not that he gives two sh*ts) are threads like these.

What I will say in his defense is that he obviously can't be held responsible for what his victims went on to do. Lacy was a great win at the time, and in part due to the thrashing he dished out, Lacy was never the same. However Hopkins put an even worse beating on Johnson, and look what he went on to do. It's because Glen is a better fighter, which in turn is a small part of the reason why Bernard's resume craps all over Joe's.

 

What challenging fights against good fighters had Johnson took before the Hopkins fight? None that's what.

Sure he's had a few good wins since but when he's fought against world class opponents he's had more defeats than victories and even with his biggest wins he lost the rematches against Woods and Tarver.

The difference with Tocker Pudwill is no-one claims that is a goodd win for Calzaghe like they do with Johnson for Hopkins. Richie Woodall looked a far more dangerous opponent before he fought Calzaghe than Johnson did pre-Hopkins.

Seriously man, have a look at his record if you're saying "Calzaghe spent much of his prime beating up nobodies," but are trying to defend Johnson (and by extension Hopkins win over him,) I can only think you don't appreciate just how **** his resume was before fighting Hopkins - either that or it's one of the most biased, hypocritical statements I've ever read on ESB.

 

He was in fact dropped, then buzzed at least twice more in the fight. Nearly dropped at the end of the 7th and shaken at the end of the 8th.

You pointed out that he was "good enough" to contest again. It's useless trivia, it means nothing and the way you chose to word it makes it look as though you're lauding it as a great win.

Why is it guff? Because it's totally irrelevant and had no reason to be attached to the Tarver bullet-point. He eventually fought Calzaghe, what difference does it make if they came to a stale-mate in negotiations years ago? Hopkins had only gotten older since and Calzaghe had only gone on to look better.

According to whom? Those guys' promoters? The last thing I want is to see another ****ing title thrown into the mix, but people are seemingly accepting the WBO as a "Major". Where will it end? Wasn't so long ago that the boxing world viewed the WBO as a meaningless vanity garment, I still feel that way. As for the Bute fight, I'm surprised someone who seems to understand fickle boxing politics as well as you would include that stuff about Hopkins "backing out" of earlier Calzaghe and Jones Jr fights.
And being undisputed doesn't mean owning all the belts "at one point or another". It means cleaning out the division and holding all the championships at once. Calzaghe didn't make that a priority 'til after Lucas, Beyer and Ottke retired, and it only happened because Kessler broke the SMW stalemate and went to someone else's backyard (Thank god).