The reason for Calzaghe's retirement

Common sense. ^

 

Do you think he would win a rematch?

What would he do different?

He is by far the better boxer, but I just can't see him dealing with Calzaghe's workrate for 12 rounds.

 

How:huh

Tell me how Hopkins-Calzaghe II pans out? Does Hopkins discover a hidden reservoir of stamina before the fight or something? How does it turn out different from the first fight?

 

Well, Calzaghe gets alot of unfair stick. That's unfortunate for all of us. Whether we're trying to objectively praise his accomplishments and quality, or constructively break down his shortcomings and weaknesses, there will always be an element of single minded mistrust there between the parties. Personally, I keep it rational. I do my best to factor it all in.

 

Basically they're running low on ammo:deal


Although, I'm quite disappointed Bad Chad's name hasn't been chucked out a bit more; I would favour Calzaghe to beat him, but at least there is an element of the unknown in this match-up. Calzaghe-Hopkins II would be a re-run of the first fight.

 

I'm glad you brought up stamina - and it's something I've mentioned before; it takes ALOT more energy to fight in retreat mode, squirming along the ropes, slipping, ducking - essentially running - than it does to fight coming forward. Did Hopkins discover a "hidden reservoir of stamina" when he fought Pavlik? His hands and feet almost never stopped moving..

We can spend more time on this if you're interested. It's a great subject.

 

Do you objectively believe that?

I just want to make sure nobody is carrying an agenda before we get started.

 

:huh

Ya what?

 

I just find it amusing that Slappy is pouring scorn on fighting 3 bums to equal Marcianos record because it would be meaningless....

Nice to know he's finally figured it out, albeit 12 years too late.

 

Yes, I do believe it.

And what agenda are you talking about?

 

???

(Hopkins) his hands and feet almost never stopped moving (in the Pavlik fight).

THE agenda people have turned this issue into.

Good, glad to hear you're apparently more interested in the truth.

So, please, elaborate on why you think Hopkins would clam up and let Calzaghe try and jab and poke all over him again without answering back. Was there something specific to it, or is just the vibe you're getting?

 

Fair do's.

But I fail to see how a Hop rematch offers anything other than the best financial option.

A clearer win will be put down to Hop being even older

Close win leaves him exactly where he is now

Loss severly damages his legacy. It shouldnt, but his own facination with his 'O' and the desperation of people who cant wait to pull him down guarentees this.

No positives away from financial.


There are more boxing reasons to fight Dawson, a loss would be viewed as normal practice, the passing of the torch to the younger champ from the 37 yr old.

A win would be a very good addition to the resume, and depending on Dawsons career after, maybe a great win.

Unforunately he brings no money or name.

Thats why he retired. He didnt run away from Hopkins

Whether people like it or not,the fight last year was a more daunting prospect.

Calzaghe is a notoriously slow starter who hemoraghes early rounds while working out his opponent. Wouldnt be the case here.

It was first time at a new weight, fighting in the States. Would be his 3rd and in Cardiff here.

Hopkins would be a year older.

Why run away?.

 

Agreed, it's all risk for Calzaghe to fight Hopkins again. If it wasn't for the fact that Joe spent soo much time over the years complaining about the critics, I wouldn't even mention it. I agree he would get ripped by the haters that would use the "he was 44 years old!" excuse if Calzaghe won a second time, but like I said; Calzaghe cries alot about the criticism.

I don't want to hear him complaining in the future. He's forfeited his right do so by refusing to rematch Hopkins, and take a young threat like Dawson. Forever.

 

He does love a moan. But he is British, and thats what we do.