Who was more over the hill when they fought?

Not the reaction you wanted in trying to get loads of people to say Hopkins was shot when he fought Calzaghe. Ha ha.
Still people age different, only yesterday I was reading of a fighter who debuted in the early 1900s and had his first fight 10, was a top fighter who ended up being shot at around 18.
Anyway Calzaghe was a bit more shot then Hopkins, but not much and neither Tyson or Holyfield were shot

 

As said before. Calzaghe was more shot than Hopkins and I didnt feel either Holyfield or Tyson were shot. Tyson was favoured to beat Holyfield.

Seems I exposed you there . Except it Calzaghe beat your hero, and nobody answered how you wanted them to .
This might lure out some big Hopkins fans to humour you and say Hopkins was shot, to make you feel better. But you keep trying to say Hopkins was so past it on here and then in the next sentence say Joe should have fought him again. Bit odd when you think Hopkins was that far removed atsch.



P.S.
Whats a Jamie dodger? Is it the same as a Jammie dodger?

 

*Opens realsoulja thread confidently expecting it to be about Joe Calzaghe*

*Suprised to see is actually on a different subject*

*Notes that Calzaghe is still mentioned in first sentence and all subsequent posts by realsoulja*

All is well.

 

Why is calzaghe hopkins obvious? Calzaghe retired one fight later - hopkins is still fighting.

Both fighters adapted their styles as they got older but Calzaghe needed speed and workrate which goes earlier than what Hopkins used - technique and brains.

Hopkins was way closer to his best level - dispite being 3 years older.

 

Hopkins is 7 years Joe's senior not 3.

Jones was the one who is 3 years older than Calzaghe... I hope you wouldn't say Jones was closer to his best level.

 

Tyson was prime post-prison?

Anglosaxon is chavscum. :rofl