Who do you rate more highly: Joe Calzaghe or Bernard Hopkins?

Calzaghe is better without a doubt. Stop ridding Hopkins' nuts fools.

 

Hopkins by a landslide !

 

:good
21 and counting....

 

They've pretty much accomplished the same things during their careers. Calzaghe has an advantage going head to head, and career record. (retiring undefeated) In addition to beating one of the guys that beat him. (Roy Jones)

But most importantly Bernard has what I consider the best heads up on Calzaghe in quality of opposition.

 

hopkins

 

These are two examples why Calzaghe's a better fighter. Somebody also said that Calzaghe would have troubles with prime RJJ only (I mean Hopkins' opponents) and I agree too. Another thing that makes me for Joe is that he shows how a great fighter should finish his career. He finished, as a champion, besides UNDEFEATED, said ok it's enough, beat many great fighters including Hopkins. B-Hop could finish after beating Pavlik or take 2 more fights I mean Dawson and Adamek, while avoiding these fights he loses a lot IMO. If he won them both he would be for sure a better fighter. Currently Dawson and Adamek are the best boxers in their divisions, so after beating BadChad, fight Adamek and become a king of another division you could be saying he was better. Two losses to JT don't look proud. He should fight two guys I mentioned and finish his carrer as a champion. Then I think nobody would doubt he's better than Calzaghe. Of course there's always somebody who will complain it's not a true. They both have accomplished a lot, their achievements are at similar level, thus winning Dawson and Adamek would let him to stand a bit above JC.

greetings,

 

Hopkins but not by too much.

Calzaghe is arguably the greatest fighter ever at 168. Hopkins arguably the greatest at 160.

 

Hopkins still in p4p doesnt duck any1

 

Does anyone understand the relevance of the fact that BHOP has a close dec and split dec loss to Taylor at the AGE OF 40 and 41 and a close split dec loss to Calzaghe at 43?

How that detracts from his career is beyond comprehension.

 

Who cares his age ? If he's fighting that means he's in good shape and he's able to defeat guys like JT. The age doesn't matter, result does. Two losses, via SD or UD, by JT - for 'ATG' fighter ain't look good. Finally loss by Calzaghe, also shows who was better in direct fight, not much, but Calzaghe was better. You know ... everyone has to know when to 'go down from the stage', it's also a way of recognizing great champions. JC has done it in proper time. This is why I consider his as a better fighter than Hopkins. That's my opinion and you will not change it, dude.

I'm also sure that if JC was American then he would rule this poll, altho it was ment to vote with 'brain not with your passport'.

 

Calzaghe was very lucky to get the decision against a 43 year old Hopkins. A prime Hopkins would have destroyed him. Isn't that much obvious?

 

shut the **** up seriously... you're just repeating what others have said. You nuthug Calzaghe, you don't care for any other boxer, or boxing for that matter. "incredible longetivity" please shut up. "blown-up welters" those blown-up welters are ATGs. Tell me, is Hagler overrated?

Prime Hopkins beats prime Calzaghe any time.

 

Never been a fan of Hopkins....as a person or a boxer. Saying that though, he is of the greatest of his era. The fact that he's still doing the business, at his age, speaks volumes. Respek.