Official Joe Calzaghe Vs Hopkins

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:21

Well done JC!

Hopkins does not BOX anymore, he klet the fight slip over the last half of the fight.

Hopkins was cheating his way to get a rest.

I had JC by 2!

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:25

i'm just pleased the judges didn't reward that from hopkins.

it was a very hard fight to score.

i can understand people having all sorts of variations on it.

but ultimately calzaghe was pushing the action.

hopkins was so negative.

bring on roy jones.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:26

Agreed, Hopkins started blindingly, but then back peddled his way through the last few rounds, and that's where he lost it.

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:28

Now Hopkins can retire.

JC came to fight, Hopkins came to wrestle hold and run!.

Serves him right!

thepocketrocket · Post by **thepocketrocket** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:34

Disgrace, the clean sneak shots were from BHop, he made Calzaghe fight at his pace, pathetic judging fron Giampa, I give up

STP · Post by **STP** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:36

I had Hopkins sneaking it, with the knockdown crucial. All the cleanest, hardest, sneakiest and correct shots were coming from the direction of the black man.

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:36

But they scored on aggression!

Hopkins is a bad advert for Boxing, that is not boxing.

Grab and hold!

JC - BOYO!!!!!!

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:41

thepocketrocket wrote:Disgrace, the clean sneak shots were from BHop, he made Calzaghe fight at his pace, pathetic judging fron Giampa, I give up

That judges scorecard was an absolute disgrace. The result will be up for debate. I had it a by 2 rounds for Calzaghe.

Cannibal · Post by **Cannibal** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:44

I think this teaches everyone a big lesson...

If you want to win the big fights, have allegedly in your corner. Any other Brit fighter under different promotional banners seem to lose on the big occasions.

bigdave82 · Post by **bigdave82** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:46

I had it 114-114

Hopkins is like Chelsea. A lot of talent but it's never used to the full, instead only just enough.

Hopkins landed the cleaner punches but he deserved nothing

thepocketrocket · Post by **thepocketrocket** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:47

Yeah, Hatton had aggresion and won about 2 rounds on the scorecards

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:48

bigdave82 wrote:I had it 114-114

Hopkins is like Chelsea. A lot of talent but it's never used to the full, instead only just enough.

Hopkins landed the cleaner punches but he deserved nothing

Exactly!

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2008, 23:50

thepocketrocket wrote:Yeah, Hatton had aggresion and won about 2 rounds on the scorecards

Let it go mate.

Hatton is a chav.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:17

I had it about even possibly a round ether way depending on whether your keener on cleaner work or aggression and volume but a debate could have been made for ether, however I think Cortez should have taken points from hopkins for holding particularly holding and hitting which I saw him do a few times.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:19

Cannibal wrote:I think this teaches everyone a big lesson...

If you want to win the big fights, have allegedly allegedly in your corner. Any other Brit fighter under different promotional banners seem to lose on the big occasions.

Haye-Enzo?

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:21

Cannibal wrote:I think this teaches everyone a big lesson...

If you want to win the big fights, have allegedly allegedly in your corner. Any other Brit fighter under different promotional banners seem to lose on the big occasions.

I don't buy the inference that there was something crooked, the fight was 50/50 but calzaghe was more aggressive simple as. American judge american soil, don't think Frank made the difference.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:23

bigdave82 wrote:I had it 114-114

Hopkins is like Chelsea. A lot of talent but it's never used to the full, instead only just enough.

Hopkins landed the cleaner punches but he deserved nothing

Shouldnt you have had it 114-113 BHOPs because of the first round KD?

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:25

Calzaghe was just so unprofessional. They should have made fights like these earlier on. Take a loss, come back better, iron the faults out and come back with a vengeance! You don't save it til the end. Joe and Enzo's preparation will surely be questioned also. They needed US sparring partners, they needed to wise up with talk like, "We don't have to change anything, it's Hopkins that must change to fight us."

Does this show that Warren has little faith, making this fight when Hopkins is 43?

That said, Hopkins' last 2 fights have been unwatchable.

Joe needs to really come back with an impressive win now.

Ultimately, this wasn't boxing. This isn't how you teach ppl to fight. Welsh newspapers are already calling this "an epic" and quoting Welsh fans to make it clear that "Joe smashed him."

Nothing to rave about. I think the general idea is that if Joe had taken this fight in 2001 or 2006 even, that he would have been beaten pretty clearly. Joe supports the argument that British fighters need to step out of their comfort zones and learn how to fight inside properly/learn compact, Western style aggression.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:30

I had it 117-110, I can see the case for 114-113, but BHOPs won 6rounds clearly (1,4,7,8, 10,12) and has a strong case for 2nd and 3rd.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:35

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:I had it 117-110, I can see the case for 114-113, but BHOPs won 6rounds clearly (1,4,7,8, 10,12) and has a strong case for 2nd and 3rd.

I just think, this isn't boxing. If I was a judge I'd go home, I'd boycott the show for not boxing properly.

Just as I thought with Joe v Bika and Hopkins v Wright.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:50

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:I had it 117-110, I can see the case for 114-113, but BHOPs won 6rounds clearly (1,4,7,8, 10,12) and has a strong case for 2nd and 3rd.

Now I scored the fight for Hopkins - but Joe won the 4th definately.

8th I gave to Joe but could have been level.

2nd and 3rd were Hopkins rounds definately.

12 was level, I think thats were it should remain.... its as bad a level a round as you can get.

Poncey · Post by **Poncey** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:16

I had Joe by 1 (114-113).

observer1 · Post by **observer1** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:17

i don't blame them for one judge giving it to Hopkins, the fight could easily have gone to any one of them...

They both had their Positives/negatives.

i personally scored the fight for Hopkins, but i can see if JC won it.

I guess thats the Negative about Boxing decisions... they can go anywhere and just wont make sense and tell the story.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:19

Autobarn wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:I had it 117-110, I can see the case for 114-113, but BHOPs won 6rounds clearly (1,4,7,8, 10,12) and has a strong case for 2nd and 3rd.
I just think, this isn't boxing. If I was a judge I'd go home, I'd boycott the show for not boxing properly.

Just as I thought with Joe v Bika and Hopkins v Wright.

I quite enjoyed it

manchester-mexican · Post by **manchester-mexican** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:24

I thought JC just done enuff,but who cares,his rec now says 45-0-0 and well done,B-FLOP shud retire he has nuttin left 2 offer the sport,his negative,counter punchin,grabbin,fakin injury is'nt wot the fans want 2c,still a MW legend but his times up.