Where was the controversy?

i thought the coverage overall was a bit ****. Richie 'beleive you me' Woodhall cant score fights and Rawling cant commentate.

 

I thought there was several rounds where the scoring could have gone either way. I had Hopkins winning 114-113 but, as I say, I felt it was a close fight.

 

Hopkins won the fight I had him well ahead he demonstrated far better ring generalship and classier boxing, things that used to be major factors in scoring a fight. In the current climate where scoring a fight seems to be based on who attempts to throw more punches a quality fighter like Pernell Whitiker wouldn't have won half his title fights. Just like the Pacman-JMM fight the judges gave it to the person who was the ineffective aggressor. I gave Hopkins 3 of the first four including a 10-8 and only managed to give Calzaghe 2 of the last 6.

It was a hollow victory in a sense that 'the better man lost' and if 45-0 Calzaghe represents the upper echelons of the p4p list along with Pac-man then boxing really is in a sorry state. Thats two guys who have very little technique in p4p terms and can't throw their punches properly.

Watch a Cotto or Mayweather fight then watch these two and tell me who looks more like the old school greats.

 

It was only a hollow victory in your eyes, most had Joe winning clearly

You know what I find amusing? The people that seem to have Hopkins winning are the very same people that picked him before the fight.

 

Ok hit me with your best shot - what have you got for me!

 

You know what I find amusing? The same people who picked Calzaghe before the fight are the same people who don't think its was a bad decision.

 

All of the posters worth a **** thought the decision was fine, other than Adalaide Byrd's who forgot she was no longer in the kitchen when she tried that home cooking

 

I'm sure Barry Morrison agrees with you. atsch

 

The best posters on this site, Hopkins fans amongst them had Calzaghe winning by differing margins

In the Brit forum it seems you and dan-b are the only two that dispute it, the same two that were the most vocal Hopkins pickers beforehand. Hmmm...

 

Fair enough. I accept it was a fight that was open to interpretation. I'm probably just a bit pissed at been on the wrong end of a tight decision. Fair play.... :good

 

I rewatched the fight & scored it 115-112 for Hopkins. I gave Hopkins rounds 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10 & 12. 12 was hard to score along with 8 & 9. Lets say I give Calzaghe 12 thats still a win for Hopkins. 116-111 is a joke.

 

Yes and the fight played out EXACTLY how I expected. Unfortunately the judges were as easily impressed by incorrect punching and poor pressure fighting as you!

 

115-112...really

I can almost accept Hopkins by like a point, but that is absurd and I'm disapointed in you...

 

Dan- your right. Simple these guys don't know how to score a fight.

 

atsch You just said the decision was fine?