Why do Hopkins fans say he was washed up when he fought Calzaghe?

only over the first ten rounds at most, yes, but over 12 rounds Zaghes clinched it

 

It was a close fight. I had it 6 rounds each and with the KD factored in: 114-113 Hopkins.

 

Hopkins MW run was over rated as was his power. He was a large MW (his first handfull of fights coming at 168 - 175 )

His best wins coming from 2 former Welterweights and Journeyman Glen Johnson, dropped twice by an 18-2 Segundo Mercado who couldnt even get a win after the second fight then fought mediocre opposition losing to people with high punch outputs in Taylor and Jones

He was always suited to be a career 168-175 fighter but fought at 160 to have the size advantage over a lot of his opponents, who knows he could have been ranked higher had he fought at these weights instead of middleweight

 

Well, for the record, the Mercado fight was at an elevation of 10,000 ft.

 

:blood

 

uh, he was 43 years old. not exactly prime years for a fighter.

 

Physically he is not prime but he has made adjustments with age. I thought Bhop won but it was such a **** fight the real losers where the fans! this is the second thread today about that garbage. . . people should let it go

 

I don't see how people thought BHOP won. You could either say Calzaghe adapted, Bernard's age was showing, or a combination of both, which is what I think is the case, but Bernard was looking for ways out in my opinion.

Calzaghe was picking up the pace, and while BHOP managed to block a lot of shots, Calzaghe's workrate was getting to Hopkins, and if the fight went on any longer, I think some serious shots would start getting through due to Hopkins' noticable fatigue.

I don't think Hopkins is the type of fighter, at least not at this point that will allow himself to get beat up. I think he'll find a way out. I can't get in his head, but the way he hid from the interview after the Dawson fight and some other questionable moves lead me to believe this is a possibility.

 

I never said it but I completely understand why people say it.
If there's a surefire way to get a bite from gullible Calzaghe fans,this is it.
That or have a little pop at Joe's resume.
And for the record,I may be a Hopkins fan,but I have a ton of respect for Calzaghe as well.
Now don't shoot the messenger:nono
Brother just tryin to tell folks the way it is.:bart

 

he wasnt washed up, but he was 43 years old and had lost 2 of his last 4 fights...pretty much the reason joe fought him...and still almost lost

 

**** B Quit!

 

Hopkins is a fighter and that's with a capital F. He knew that fight was hard for him to win the way he looked old sometimes against Wright and the way Joey was so much on top when he beat Kessler so he did what he always done in his life, fight against the odds. Same thing with Tito, same thing with Tarver, same thing with Pavlik, same thing with Pascal and finally with Chad Dawson. He was 43 and now he is 47 and you come up with this thread? BS!!!

 

Instead of looking up The Ring magazine to decide when someone is prime, why not watch all of their career fights instead? :huh

Anyone who thinks a 43 year old Hopkins shorn of power and stamina was anywhere near as good as the 1996-2003 version (97-01 peak) is an idiot.

Watch these fights in full:

Trinidad
Glen Johnson
Keith Holmes
Echols II

And then tell me the B-Hop who 'lost' to Jermain Taylor in 2005 was prime. Even then he was no longer capable of fighting hard consistently for 12 rounds or finish people off.

****ing twat. atsch

 

He wasn't washed up AT ALL. . . I don't think he was 100% primed, but hten again, neither was Calzaghe. . They both were about the same "out of prime."

 

Maybe because Hopkins has one knockout in the last 10 years? dumb asses. You can't gauge Hopkins 'prime' if you haven't followed his career. he's been fighting for over 20 years, to follow 5 fights and try to sum him up is just stupid. A younger Hopkins TKOs a younger calzaghe easily.