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

sorry you made no sense. Theres also no point in talking to you as you clearly 'hate' calzaghe. You said on the first page somehting about being pleased about all these answers and how they were so unbiased becaused they pleased you...well how is there even a point to talk to you as your only looking for one side.

I made a case for hopkins resume being overated and it is. Could calzaghe have face roy earlier???not really. If you dont agree with that then your asking for something totally unrealistic like just move to america with your wife and children and make your career there.

 

you have to be a pretty remarkable fighter to beat guys like Kessler and Hopkins while having no power

 

calzaghe is great... Hopkins is exceptional

Hopkins opposition is better....

put it this way....if he faced everyone Joe faced he would have beaten them also...and probably done more damage. I dont think Lacy would have lasted 12....I dont think Kessler would either

 

Kessler would have had a very good chance against Hopkins at the point Calzaghe faced him. Eubank too would have been a toughie (that X wins). Indeed he may have stopped Lacy.
Similarly, outside of the great Roy Jones Junior, Calzaghe would have had a similar record as Hopkins against his opponents, though I don't see him losing to Jermain Taylor.
Mr swing, meet Mr roundabout.

 

how do you think Calzaghe would do at age 43???

hopkins was amazing @36

 

Calzaghe would have no problems with Tito, Glen Johnson would be an interesting fight though the green version that Hop faced would lose to Joe Calzaghe. Winky is always awkward to predict, but I sense Joe would outwork him, to a UD. You maybe onto something with Tarver when I think about it though, a tough fight to call.

 

Its not really relevant to the argument? Hopkins is an utter exception fighting at 43. Succeeding at his advanced age doesn't trump all other fighters though because of its uniqueness, if he'd achieved all that he has in the last 10 years by age 33, he not be a lesser fighter for it.

EDIT: sorry, I think you mean in paralell career terms. The 43 year old Calzaghe would get mashed. 99% of all fighters who ever laced em up, would get mashed.

 

Tito's power won't trouble a young strong 168 Calzaghe. Seriously. It's a long old night for Tito, although a young Joe may actually stop him.
Winky a superior fighter? I'm not sure man. I think thats a stretch.

 

If Calzaghe fought Hopkins' resume, do you think he'd do better or worse than 49-5-1?

Personally, I think he'd do slightly better than that. I think Roy would be the only person I'd feel pretty comfortable in giving him a loss against.

 

Your right, Roy is his only 'definite' loss. Though 56 fights in, something unexpected will surely happen? Hoya makes a good call on Tarver, a man I don't like or particularly rate, but that is a tough fight to call, no?

 

thats a good point. RJJ is the only one i could see calzaghe losing to.