who is greater, Bernard Hopkins or Joe Calzaghe?

Joe Calzage was shot and smashed a prime Hop, Hop is American and black though, so people wil say him, but real boxing experts know Calzageh smashed him and is way better.

 

Hopkins of course. Not even close. 99% of neutrals will concur.

 

R U kidding?

What has Calzaghe done besides beating some ok contenders and granpas?

 

Don't think there's much question to this, really. And nothing will change in ten years unless somebody comes out of retirement...

 

You should have made this public because three people voted Calzaghe...

 

Hard one to say.
Both are looked at as ATGs and both have done things in boxing that not even legendary fighters have done. I think they'll be seen equally.

 

:good

 

LOL Hops best win was beating up over-rated tiny DLH, he was prime and smashed by a shot Joe.

If Joe was black, and Hop was white, no one would say Hopkins.

 

In terms of career it's obviously Hopkins. The likes of Pudwill, Lacy etc don't compare with Johnson, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Tarver, Wright and Pavlik.

In terms of prime for prime you only need to watch Calzaghe's fight with a 44 year-old version of Hopkins to know what would happen.

 

If you weren't a Brit you wouldn't say that.

 

adding a year on to Hop, discrediting him, even though a 44yr old smashed Pavlik to pieces, then putting journey man Johnson and old man Trin ( blown up Trin) into your list shows how biased you are.

Beating up blown up average DLH is his best win, Tarver was useless, even Dawson beat him


Shot Joe smashed Lacy, Kessler, RJJ and prime Hop.

Green Joe smashed woodhall and Eubank

Broken hand Joe smashed up Reid.

Pavlik,Dawson, younger RJJ, younger Hop, Toney, Collins, Johnson etc all sucked Joe, these are real facts.

 

This is the ****ing stupidity of boxing fans, right in this very post.

You're stating Pudwill, a fighter that was a last minute replacement due to Steve Collins (a legitimate threat) pulling out with an injury in a fight.

You've left out Eubank, Woodhall, Veit, Starie, Reid, Mitchell, Mkertchian, Bika, Kessler and Hopkins himself from the reckoning.

"A 44 yr old version of Hopkins" - yet again, another stupid thing to say, that 44 yr old version of Hopkins according to you, got three of his greatest wins after his 43rd birthday against Tarver, Wright and Pavlik. Calzaghe at 37 wasn't a spring chicken, had known injury problems his entire career and was two fights away from retirement at the time.

Fighters age differently, Bernard is living proof of that. Any one who thinks age was a real contributing factor to Bernard losing that night is plainly stupid, because that version of Calzaghe was no where near what he was in 2001-2004.

Joe Calzaghe, arguably, by beating Bernard Hopkins, has a greater win in his resume than Bernard Hopkins ever got. He was the one moving up in weight to take on the common consensus champ at the next level.

 

he schooled lacy, when everybody was shouting that lacy was gunna KO him, and lacy was then undefeated IBF champ, being spoken of as the next tyson, but joe wins, all of a sudden, he was always ****

then he beat kessler (without having to headbutt him), who was on top of his game and then undefeated WBA champ, people were then expecting joe to lose, but calzaghe wins, he was robotic and easy to figure out

when he fought Hopkins, B-Hop was top ranked light-heavyweight and a top 5 P4P fighter, who then went on to show he was still a force by beating pavlik

Calzaghe is very underrated

 

Hopkins is seriously overrated and Joe is better H2H and also for resume/achievements.