Man Calzaghe's stock has really gone up since last nights fights. Long live the king baby!! 46 and 00000000000000000
I find it funny how Hopkins fans won't look at it rationaly. All they can do is say things like 'you must be an idiot if that's how you see it' or 'anygood historian would disagree' without. He's the number 1 lhw over 3 years on ffs. I said physical prime not necerarily p4p. Look Tarver >>> Tito, Pavlik >> DLH, Wright >>> Eastman, Calzaghe >>> Taylor, Pascal >>> that bum he drew with and then beat in the rematch. You may consider the mw opponents are better p4p but they certainly aren't overall.
All of this just continually reaffirms that you have NOT seen Hopkins's fights from the late 90s and early 00s. It's really rather obvious.
I've seen about 10 threads praising Hopkins since last night, and what he has accomplished (rightfully so), but to this day, Joe C still gets no props for beating the man? Are you kidding me?
Hopkins is not in prime now and was past his prime by the time he fought De La Hoya. But the reason why a man in his forties can push Taylor and Calzaghe to debatable razor thin decisions and still beat guys like Pavlik and Pascal, is because despite slowing down with age, he is still more skilled than they are.
To be honest. Roy Jones was knocked out conclusively yesterday and Hopkins won a big fight, yet Jones will always be greater than Bernard.
Yeah Joe is great because he can piggyback on all of Hopkin's achievements. Sure. Breidis Prescott is also a great champion considering Khan's achievements. Iran Barkley is also greater than Hearns.... the list goes on. Calzaghe fans, do yourself a favor and become football fans.
They say that because you are a ****ing idiot. You don't know what your talking about but you keep talking. Your bias and lack of knowledge makes you worthless to us.
I've seen Hopkins third pro fight, RJJ 1, Johnson, Echols, Joppy, Eastman, Tito, DLH, Taylor 1+2, Tarver, Wright, Calzaghe, Pavlik + Pascal 1. Both Jones and Johnson were very green against him imo. Their title reign was about equal except Calzaghe won his against a better fighter and at the end of his reighn he beat the young stud (Kessler) and Hopkins lost (Taylor). Don't pull the 'Ward did better against Calzaghe's left overs' either because A) He didn't if you actually watch the fights and understand the circumsances + B) Taylor did the same thing to Hopkins with Joppy and Eastman. It's always the same 'Hopkins is too old now' (without showing any real decline) and then 'oh he's the G.O.A.T'. It's been happening for 5 years now. To that other guy says you can't peak at 40+, What about Lance Armstrong? I work in a gym and there's a guy who comes in who's on the gear but has a body that's gret for a 20 year old.
Why didn't Calzaghe rematch the old fogey? C'mon Joe, you can still come out of retirement and fight the old fogey again, or are you still afraid of the old codger figuring you out in the rematch?
Nah.....Nard wasn't in his physical prime at 43 or 44 bro. How can you even think that? I mean "PHYSICAL PRIME"??? Seriously? You think a man in his 40's or even mid to late 30's would be in their physical primes? Don't be silly kid.