Why is Calz vs B-Hop considered "close"?

Calzaghe was never shot and could have been up at 175lbs years before he was.

I suppose the purpose of saying he was shot and fat is designed to dscredit Hopkins?

 

calzaghe's style:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqFLXayD6e8[/ame]

 

My God are you just being stubborn to annoy people or genuinely ignorant?

the 3 judges score cards are based on their opinion. any time a fight goes the distance, the judges opinion is what is used to decide the winner. They are not infallable. Hence why controversies often arise in this sport.

by your criteria 88' olympic finals Roy Jones should not be rationally considered controversial...after all the judges scored it for the other guy.

the reason that fight is considered controversial is because in many people's opinion hopkins won the fight.

 

Calzaghe was in no danger of losing the fight on the scorecards, it really was a straight forward points win on the officials scorecards for Joe Calzaghe .

 

On studying the official scorecards Calzaghe had effectively won after 9 rounds as Hopkins needed to win the last three rounds to win the fight at that stage, after the tenth round Hopkins with two rounds to go basically needed a stoppage to win or a minimum of some knockdowns as he was so far behind on the scorecards.

People tend to think that split decisions are close, sometimes they are but sometimes they are not, and this fight was an example of a split decision that the winner was never in danger of losing as two of the three judges scored heavily in favour of the eventual winner.

 

Shut it u flaaaaaaaannggeeeee!

 

:roflatsch His hands were brittle China and he had a blobby stomach, which is uncharacteristic of Zaggers. And yet he still bent prime Hopkins over and pounded out a clear victory.:deal

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

:smooch

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Yeah, fat as a pig!

 

The fight was 114-113 to Hopkins. That s the correct score of the fight..Simple as that

 

Calzaghe has one of the ugliest styles ever. Ever. Somehow, it's even worse than Hatton's. He wins fights because of his output, but the problem is he has no power in anything he throws and its not landing half as much as judges think. He's had fights stopped countless times because of a useless flurry where the referee decided enough was enough.

There was no way Calzaghe vs. Hopkins was gonna be a decent fight. It's one of those fights where you can't say anything. You can't say "Calzaghe slapped Hopkins about" or "Hopkins gave Joe a boxing lesson" because neither of them ****ing happened. The most telling thing you can do to Hopkins is have him accuse you of lowblows. Hopkins doesn't lose fights, he just makes them look ****ing ugly and falls to his knees.

Neither man won. You can't say Joe lost his unbeaten record but you can't say he beat Hopkins either.

 

Pretty accurate!

 

Because it was close. Most people judge a fight for themselves rather than the opinions of the judges, which are just that - subjective opinions.

This is like saying "why is Whitaker-Ramirez considered a robbery when the judges scored it for Ramirez?". Judges are human and sometimes they get it wrong.

It was a close fight and it really just depends who's work you preferred.

 

He got you...

Admit you were wrong.

 

Calzaghe's hands are ****ed and he still beat Hopkins on my card. I am not a Joe C nuthugger but I can appreciate that his "slaps", "windmilling", style make his victories all the more impressive. If the guys hands were not glass he'd have been so much better which is a credit to him. The mans key to success required great commitment, endurance and fitness, but he also had the intelligence an elite fighter needs, he could adapt.

I swear he would've put on a masterclass in Cardiff, Wales had the re-match went ahead, Hopkins would not have dealt with his pace and as Joe already solved the B-Hop puzzle after 5 or 6 Rounds in the US, then it would've taken him a lot less time to get into gear had they met. Cardio-wise Joe would always give B-Hop trouble.

I said it then and I'll say it now, Calzaghe would've absolutely destroyed Dawson's will had they fought. Dawson at the time was the latest of a run of poor US hype-jobs like Pavlik, Williams etc who actually weren't as great as they were made out to be. Joe would have schooled him but as usual if you tried to make a reasonable response in terms of Boxing you would be met with the whole "Calslappy", "Calzone" rhetoric.

 

Love Calzaghe but it was a split decision with the loser getting the knockdown. So of course it was close!