Who Thinks Hopkins Beat Calzaghe?

Very insightful analysis. You should be a judge.

 

Yes, yes it is!

When it comes to debating results, I do put alot of stock in it, I must confess.

 

I think he is spot on, every other fighter in the world would have been slatted to hell for acting the way bernard did in that fight. But because he was fighting Joe Calzaghe he gets away with it.

If there was a better referee and some points were taken, the fight wouldnt have been close at all.:bart

We got a righful winner.

This content is protected

 

You think he is spot on? That's pretty disappointing from you then. Hopkins is 43, you absolutely cannot expect a 43-year-old man no matter how skilled he is to be able to fight at the same pace as a man in his mid-30s, it just isn't possible. Sure, Hopkins used some unsavoury tactics to sneak breathers, but it's not exactly Tyson biting Holyfield's ear or Golota low-blowing Bowe, is it?? Hopkins is a wily old fox - he knew he could get away with it so he did. It's the ref's prerogative to stop him gaining an unfair advantage, it's not Hopkins's duty to show great sportsmanship. Is what he did more unsavoury than Calzaghe's recent tasteless attempts at showboating? Are Ali and Dundee "pussies" for the old glove trick against Henry Cooper??

This content is protected

Hopkins is the more skilled boxer, the superior boxer, and he showed that.

 

Its not a matter of sportsmanship its a matter of breaking the rules of the game and ignoring the fact to fit your own agenda, Calzaghe showboating with Roy Jones is not the same thing.

I cant see how head butts, low blows and faking low blows makes you the superior boxer, I certainly dont see how he proved it. The only way to prove that is to win more rounds than the other guy. Without Hopkins cheating he would have lost more rounds than he did, with a better referee we would have got a unanimous decision wouldve been given instead of a split. Hopkins was lucky.

 

Hopkins lost imo.

Hopkins fought scared imo, and he should have been thrown out due to all the hugging he did, but then again it was Corrupt Cortez officiating.

And for all the people who say it was a new Hopkins against Pavlik, lets be frank he had it in him to work at that rate against Joe but he knew he couldnt bully Calzaghe and Calzaghe is 1000000x the better fighter than the overated Pavlik is/was.

 

Showing superior boxing skills makes you the superior boxer, irrespective of attitude, mentality, tactics, blah blah blah. Hopkins showed he is a more skilled and superior boxer. He lost only because two judges valued workrate and ineffective aggression more than quality of work. Hopkins did not have the stamina to match Calzaghe's workrate because he is 43 - that is the only reason the fight was even so close. The difference in skill/quality was apparent throughout the fight.

 

If Hopkins adopted the same tactics he used with Pavlik against Joe, you would probably see Calzaghe having an easier time.

The only reason Calzaghe - Hopkins was close is because he was allowed to get away with things other fighters are not.

 

:good

 

It amuses me that Hopkins is pretty much praised in some quarters for his dubious tactics in that fight....he's described as 'wily', 'resourceful' and 'cunning'....

John Ruiz on the other hand is widely reviled for doing the exact same ****: faking low blows, excessive holding etc.

Double standards? I think so.

And to compare showboating to that nonsense is ludicrous, particularly given that DINAMITA mentioned Ali and Roy Jones Junior in the same post...is there anything more disgusting with regards to showboating, than wathcing Ali shuffle over the decrepit Archie Moore or Roy Jones with his hands behind the back **** with some binman?

Calzaghes showboating can be irritating but it's not comparable to Hopkins tactics in that fight....he sure didn't need to do that **** against Pavlik...only against Joe. I wonder why.

 

Bernard "wily and cunning"

If Joe did what Hopkins did he would be a cheat.

Also why are people comparing it to Joe's showboating against Jones? Last time i checked showboating (even joe's weird peekaboo thing) didnt give you any physical advantages.

 

Tyson biting Holyfields ear is worse, good comparison, good point though. Interesting topic though. The ref. in that fight allowed Holyfield to get away with headbutts, even after complaints by Tyson. The unstable Tyson took matters into his own hands. Had the ref. done his job in the entire fight, the ear biting would have never occured and we may have had another great fight for the books

I've watched the Ali Cooper fight a couple times. Tell us what actually happened with Ali / Dundee, most importantly, how long the fight was delayed.

A more skilled and superior looking boxer, often loses boxing matches. Roy Jones was not more skilled than Hopkins, he was a better, faster athlete. Marciano was 49-0, and many of his opponents were considered more skillfull (although I consider Marciano's unorthodox skills very underrated) plus his stamina and workrate were a huge part of his success. Calzaghe is similar to Marciano in this respect. His skills are also unorthodox and misunderstood, and stamina, workrate, and speed are a huge part of his success. I don't buy the 43 year old excuse. Calzaghes constant crazy pressure and improvisation always gets his opponent out of his game and causes bewilderment, most tire out because they just cannot handle his total package and this is skill that is more difficult to define. This is skill that caused Hopkins to spoil and survive, not so much because he was old and tired, but because Calzaghe adapted to Hopkins, and Hopkins did not have any other answers.

 

You're missing the point. This thread is about the judging and scoring of a fight. If the referee does not deduct points for a misdemeanour, then it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the scoring of the fight. Thus, Joe's showboating had the same relevance to the scoring as Hopkins's dubious tactics - **** all. They are merely two unsavoury sides of the story.

 

Very good post :good