What does Hopkins has to do to be ranked above Joe Calzaghe?

He is already way in front of Joe.Not going to start slating Joe but Hopkins has achieved far more.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSt9EieqqTw[/ame]

 

He doesnt have to do anything. He was way ahead before they even fought.

For those who think joe is ahead of hop, do you also think tarver is ahead of roy career wise?

 

at the point he beat tito he'd already done more than enough to be considered greater than joe. evrything from that point on just widens the gap.

 

Does Calzaghe need to come out of retirement and whoop Hopkin's ass to show you all he's the best?

Trinidad was a blown 147lber

Pavlik was a catch weight

De La Hoya was a blown up 147lber



Calzaghe would destroy Tito, De La Hoya and Pavlik gimme a break

 

Calzaghe would beat everyone Hopkins faced Period.

He would even beat Hopkins ass to boot

 

meh
eubank was a middleweight
reid lost all his big fights (apart from calzaghe who he beat)
lacy was a hype job
kessler was half blind


this trolling business is gun :lol

 

hopkins is way ahead

 

Hopkins is ATG

Calzaghe is a HOF at best.

Kiss my ass Brits!!! Except The Beatles.

 

Calzaghe was never ahead of him.

 

Calzaghe better than Hopkins? :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

its tough for hopkins because on the head to head front, he is always gonna lose to calzaghe, 1st came the blatant duck for a career high payday in 2002 and then there was the head to head defeat to calzaghe in 2008 that was sandwiched inbetween the best wins of hopkins career, despite calzaghe fighting at light heavy for the 1st time in his career, in america, with cortez refereeing, and with 3 american judges.

you then look at hopkins and think what are his best wins, does it come from fighting trinidad, de la hoya, wright, and pavlik at bogus weights? how much credit do people give mayweather for beating marquez? i look at hopkins best wins as tarver and pascal but you've got to be honest and say that they are only B-level fighters at best.

the main area where hopkins makes ground up is his outstanding longevity, to be doing what he is still doing is brilliant and shows what an extremely clever fighter he is, the press up thing was absouloute genius v pascal - the stuff of legends. one of hopkins great strengths is his mentality, he is mentally very strong, as well as being extremely clever tactically in taking away an opponents strengths.

for bernard though, you've always got to look back that there have been 8 occasions he has got into that ring and not been good enough to win, the blueprint to beat bernard is there for everyone to see and its important not to forget that. with calzaghe, there was no blueprint because of his outstanding ability to adapt and his special ability to fight in adversity - 2 of the most important charachteristics any fighter can have.

what does hopkins need to do to overtake calzaghe - its a tough one, how much does beating b-level fighters like tarver, pascal, and dawson do for you bar prove you are consistent. hopkins had 2 a-level tests in his career in jones and calzaghe and he failed them both.

when people look back at hopkins 50 years from now they will say that he is that legend who could fight till he was 50 and did press ups inbetween rounds but when it came to his big tests, he didn't quite have it.

 

*yawn*:tired

Your opinion is ****. Just biased bull****...so..kindly..GFY! :thumbsup

 

headbanger should change his screen name to "hopkins ducked calzaghe for a career high pay day in 2002." it's in every one of his ridiculous posts even though he can't provide a link for it.

everyone was always going to lose to calzaghe. joe would have never stepped in the ring if a fighter wasn't old or sucked. he's the most protected disgrace ever. joe never stepped up to a "perceived" challenge until he was 34 vs lacy.

 

**** u