Hopkins - Calzaghe fight your view as it happens

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:00

The 2nd was a fake and the 1st was a little tap accidental In a clinch, Hopkins needed rest as his stamina was crap.

He was on his bike all night.

shakermaker · Post by **shakermaker** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:05

I didn't see a replay for the 2nd one (did we get one?) but if you get caught like he did in the first one your going to feel it (cup or not).

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:11

Not fall over and cry though like Hopkins was, It was like Hopkins was taking lessons from Ruiz.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:20

On reflection, Joe did probably deserve to win. It just appeared to be the Joe of the Bika and Ashira fights which was a bit off putting. The disappointment of how bad the fight was made me think Joe wasn't doing as well as he was, perhaps. Joe and Hopkins are just too awkward to fight each other.

I'm glad the judges had it for Joe. It's time to rid boxing of Hopkins. Let the fans vote - by not coming to his fights ever again.

But Joe has more work to do at 175. Bring 'em on, Johnson and Erdei.

Joe has the Ring belt, Erdei has the Lineal belt. Let's see 'em settle it I say.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:25

Max Molyneux wrote:You don't win rounds faking low blows and fighting like Ruiz. Hopkins very little and after the knockdown could only of won two more rounds at best.

If he didn't' fight like that he would of lost even more. If you don't have a pace then don't bother fighting at all If you have to hold that bad.

No you win rounds by landing the better cleaner more effective punches. BHOPs smashed Joe with masterful clean counters bang on the button and Joe hit air and occasionally BHOPs shoulders and arms with slaps. BHOPs schooled the Welshman

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:33

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:You don't win rounds faking low blows and fighting like Ruiz. Hopkins very little and after the knockdown could only of won two more rounds at best.

If he didn't' fight like that he would of lost even more. If you don't have a pace then don't bother fighting at all If you have to hold that bad.
No you win rounds by landing the better cleaner more effective punches. BHOPs smashed Joe with masterful clean counters bang on the button and Joe hit air and occasionally BHOPs shoulders and arms with slaps. BHOPs schooled the Welshman

Calzaghe landed the cleaner punches In volume, Hopkins landed very little In single shots and at times would miss and hold then lean with the head. He was clearly beaten.

All Hopkins did was constantly stay on the back foot moving backwards, hold, fake low blows, head butt and throw a few single shots a round.

The 116-111 was right.

If Hopkins actually fought clean and didn't fight that way he would of been battered, the 2001 was more aggressive so due to styles he would of lost worse If he was younger.

If you can't fight at a decent enough pace then theres no point fighting at all, he could barely last a couple of seconds without holding.

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:33

We knew it would be an ugly fight and it was. Joe would have entertained had he been given the chance. Hopkins knew he couldnt win by boxing and he had to stop Joes workrate. I think he was hoping Cortez would deduct a point from Joe, making a fuss about the borderline punch. Lets be honest it wasnt a Nathan Cleverley cockshot was it. Joe did well as usual, I had him winning by three rounds.

Asterix · Post by **Asterix** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:46

I hate to say it, but Cortez should be fired, imo.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:51

Max Molyneux wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:You don't win rounds faking low blows and fighting like Ruiz. Hopkins very little and after the knockdown could only of won two more rounds at best.

If he didn't' fight like that he would of lost even more. If you don't have a pace then don't bother fighting at all If you have to hold that bad.
No you win rounds by landing the better cleaner more effective punches. BHOPs smashed Joe with masterful clean counters bang on the button and Joe hit air and occasionally BHOPs shoulders and arms with slaps. BHOPs schooled the Welshman
Calzaghe landed the cleaner punches In volume, Hopkins landed very little In single shots and at times would miss and hold then lean with the head. He was clearly beaten.

All Hopkins did was constantly stay on the back foot moving backwards, hold, fake low blows, head butt and throw a few single shots a round.

The 116-111 was right.

If Hopkins actually fought clean and didn't fight that way he would of been battered, the 2001 was more aggressive so due to styles he would of lost worse If he was younger.

If you can't fight at a decent enough pace then theres no point fighting at all, he could barely last a couple of seconds without holding.

No Calazage didnt land clean punches at all and you say he did because we all know you have wet dream of the Calazage posters on your wall Max. Your the most blatant nutthugger on this forum

Boxing about landing clean effective punches, Joe didnt do that last night. If you judge boxing by who is moving backwards and who is holding, faking low blows then Joe won. But boxing isnt judged in that way.

As to say Hopkins would have been battered? Who hurt who the most? Who was hurt in the fight? The only fighter hurt was Calazage, the only fighter down was Joe, the only fighter looking roughed up was Joe.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 06:53

By the way MAx I'm sure you respect the opinion of Enzo Calazage who said after the 8th, 'your losing the fight', Calazage didnt go into overdrive after that

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 20 Apr 2008, 07:02

Get in!!! £££££'s

It was a very close fight, but justice was served IMO. Cortez was wank again, what happened to his no holding policy??

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 20 Apr 2008, 07:14

it was a poor spectacle.

some of us feared that sorta fight(art of war take a bow

).

but for me hopkins was just so ridiculously cautious.

he deserved to lose it just on that basis alone really.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 20 Apr 2008, 07:22

Bleeding awful fight, Joe couldn't really cope with Hopkins spoiler tactics, who can? Didn't really feel either had won by the end, maybe Hop as he seemed to dictate most of the early rounds, but his style makes such a God awful spectactle that I can understand the judges giving it to JC.
More like a no contest than anything else.

NEXT!

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 20 Apr 2008, 07:50

Asterix wrote:I hate to say it, but Cortez should be fired, imo.

I thought he did a reasonable job. Difficult contest to ref.

British fans are beginning to get a reputation of blaming their fighters performances on referees.

Clazaghe hit hopkins low, whether it caused damage or not is irrelevent.

Hopkins holding was not excessive just a clinch at the end of an exchange.
Hopkins actually landed more on the inside than calzaghe, its just where the work was in close it was hard to see.

Hopkins has laid the blue print to beat Joe, Counter, smother, counter, smother.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:38

It's obvious a right hand is the key to beat Joe. But how about left hooks behind it? Why does no one do this? I know, Kessler has long arms and isn't much of a left hooker. Hopkins was too focused on holding.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Apr 2008, 08:42

1 Hopkins 10-8
2 Hopkins 10-9
3 Hopkins 10-9
4 Calzaghe 9- 10
5 Level 10- 10
6 Calzaghe 9-10
7 Hopkins 10-9
8 Calzaghe 9-10
9 Calzaghe 9-10
10 Hopkins 10-9
11 Calzaghe 9-10
12 Level

Hopkins 115 - Calzaghe 114.

Looked at the fight again... I definately thought the 12th was a level round, Hopkins won the first minute with some nice countering, Joe won the 2nd - mainly stalking from both guys in the last. Those who said I was was out of my mind when I made that initially - watch that round again. Hopkins was landing very cleanly in the opening minute.

I think the 5 rounds I have scored for Hopkins should be clear cut rounds, some of the ones I scored for Joe - could be level.

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

stujones wrote:1 Hopkins 10-8
2 Hopkins 10-9
3 Hopkins 10-9
4 Calzaghe 9- 10
5 Level 10- 10
6 Calzaghe 9-10
7 Hopkins 10-9
8 Calzaghe 9-10
9 Calzaghe 9-10
10 Hopkins 10-9
11 Calzaghe 9-10
12 Level

Hopkins 115 - Calzaghe 114.

Looked at the fight again... I definately thought the 12th was a level round, Hopkins won the first minute with some nice countering, Joe won the 2nd - mainly stalking from both guys in the last. Those who said I was was out of my mind when I made that initially - watch that round again. Hopkins was landing very cleanly in the opening minute.

I think the 5 rounds I have scored for Hopkins should be clear cut rounds, some of the ones I scored for Joe - could be level.

i scored more or less the same personally too...

As for the Low Blow.. i thought it was pretty Clear...

I also would not say "Hopkins was battered".

His Face was Clean after the fight, JC on the other hand had a few marks.

fist · Post by **fist** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:27

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: No you win rounds by landing the better cleaner more effective punches. BHOPs smashed Joe with masterful clean counters bang on the button and Joe hit air and occasionally BHOPs shoulders and arms with slaps. BHOPs schooled the Welshman
Calzaghe landed the cleaner punches In volume, Hopkins landed very little In single shots and at times would miss and hold then lean with the head. He was clearly beaten.

All Hopkins did was constantly stay on the back foot moving backwards, hold, fake low blows, head butt and throw a few single shots a round.

The 116-111 was right.

If Hopkins actually fought clean and didn't fight that way he would of been battered, the 2001 was more aggressive so due to styles he would of lost worse If he was younger.

If you can't fight at a decent enough pace then theres no point fighting at all, he could barely last a couple of seconds without holding.
No Calazage didnt land clean punches at all and you say he did because we all know you have wet dream of the Calazage posters on your wall Max. Your the most blatant nutthugger on this forum

Boxing about landing clean effective punches, Joe didnt do that last night. If you judge boxing by who is moving backwards and who is holding, faking low blows then Joe won. But boxing isnt judged in that way.

As to say Hopkins would have been battered? Who hurt who the most? Who was hurt in the fight? The only fighter hurt was Calazage, the only fighter down was Joe, the only fighter looking roughed up was Joe.

Your wrong Im afraid. While Hopkins had some success with the odd counter, the rest of his strategy was made up of clinching, spoiling, pretneding to be hurt and headbutting. Hopkins is a limited but good defensive fighter, but he lost to a white man last night, a man who went over to the US and had more success in LANDING punches that any other fighter has against Hopkins. Joe did as well as he could against a dirty boring fighter like Hopkins. Had Hopkins been more aggressive, Joe would have ahd more success. Either way, Joe wins.

So take it on the chin, Hopkins lost his title to a white man in his own backyard, oh and was nearly bummed at one point!

Well done Joe. And goodbye and good ridance to the most boring fighter of all time.

Fernzy · Post by **Fernzy** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:36

shakermaker wrote:faking a low blow? He got punched in the balls!!!

If that's where his balls are then he's closer to 13 than 43.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:40

fist wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote: Calzaghe landed the cleaner punches In volume, Hopkins landed very little In single shots and at times would miss and hold then lean with the head. He was clearly beaten.

All Hopkins did was constantly stay on the back foot moving backwards, hold, fake low blows, head butt and throw a few single shots a round.

The 116-111 was right.

If Hopkins actually fought clean and didn't fight that way he would of been battered, the 2001 was more aggressive so due to styles he would of lost worse If he was younger.

If you can't fight at a decent enough pace then theres no point fighting at all, he could barely last a couple of seconds without holding.
No Calazage didnt land clean punches at all and you say he did because we all know you have wet dream of the Calazage posters on your wall Max. Your the most blatant nutthugger on this forum

Boxing about landing clean effective punches, Joe didnt do that last night. If you judge boxing by who is moving backwards and who is holding, faking low blows then Joe won. But boxing isnt judged in that way.

As to say Hopkins would have been battered? Who hurt who the most? Who was hurt in the fight? The only fighter hurt was Calazage, the only fighter down was Joe, the only fighter looking roughed up was Joe.
Your wrong Im afraid. While Hopkins had some success with the odd counter, the rest of his strategy was made up of clinching, spoiling, pretneding to be hurt and headbutting. Hopkins is a limited but good defensive fighter, but he lost to a white man last night, a man who went over to the US and had more success in LANDING punches that any other fighter has against Hopkins. Joe did as well as he could against a dirty boring fighter like Hopkins. Had Hopkins been more aggressive, Joe would have ahd more success. Either way, Joe wins.

So take it on the chin, Hopkins lost his title to a white man in his own backyard, oh and was nearly bummed at one point!

Well done Joe. And goodbye and good ridance to the most boring fighter of all time.

Focusing on the racial comments indicates your biased. You also don't seem to follow boxing if you think Calazage landed punches better than RJJ

Calazage didnt land effective punches, Hopkins landed the better punches, end of discussion

fist · Post by **fist** » 20 Apr 2008, 09:59

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
fist wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: No Calazage didnt land clean punches at all and you say he did because we all know you have wet dream of the Calazage posters on your wall Max. Your the most blatant nutthugger on this forum

Boxing about landing clean effective punches, Joe didnt do that last night. If you judge boxing by who is moving backwards and who is holding, faking low blows then Joe won. But boxing isnt judged in that way.

As to say Hopkins would have been battered? Who hurt who the most? Who was hurt in the fight? The only fighter hurt was Calazage, the only fighter down was Joe, the only fighter looking roughed up was Joe.
Your wrong Im afraid. While Hopkins had some success with the odd counter, the rest of his strategy was made up of clinching, spoiling, pretneding to be hurt and headbutting. Hopkins is a limited but good defensive fighter, but he lost to a white man last night, a man who went over to the US and had more success in LANDING punches that any other fighter has against Hopkins. Joe did as well as he could against a dirty boring fighter like Hopkins. Had Hopkins been more aggressive, Joe would have ahd more success. Either way, Joe wins.

So take it on the chin, Hopkins lost his title to a white man in his own backyard, oh and was nearly bummed at one point!

Well done Joe. And goodbye and good ridance to the most boring fighter of all time.
Focusing on the racial comments indicates your biased. You also don't seem to follow boxing if you think Calazage landed punches better than RJJ

Calazage didnt land effective punches, Hopkins landed the better punches, end of discussion

Biased? Dont be silly mate, its completely legitimate to rub the salt into Hopkins, a man who was bold in his racism, a man who was sure he would not lose to a white man. Disgraceful. Last night he lost, Joe was too busy and landed much more than Hopkins and more than any fighter who has faced Hopkins. Hopkins himself simply held and held and held, with the odd counter. He tried to head butt, tried to stop Joes momentum with the pretend low blows, tried to get points deducetd of Joe. But all that does not win fights mate. You could see who wanted to fight and that was Joe. Hopkins is a horrible fighter to watch cos he doesnt like to fight, he simply tries spoil and hope that he;ll get a decision. He had relative success in spoiling Joe, compared to how Joe normally fights, yet Joe still connected more, stikept coming forward. he became more fluent as the fight went on.

Joe still undefeated and a two weight champ.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 20 Apr 2008, 10:19

lvlarc wrote:
mrbassie wrote:Some of you guys are fcuking mad and you need to watch the fight again with your flag tinted specs firmly shut up in their case. Hopkins won that fight by a mile, I gave JC three or four rounds. A schooling if ever there was one. One of the worst robberies in boxing history. I am utterly disgusted. This only happened to allow them to hype Calzaghe vs Pavlik.
Wow

Hopkins did well to negate Joe's workrate, but he didn't land enough punches of his own to win the fight. Calzaghe landed more punches on Hopkins than any of his previous opponents. I suggest you take off those 'old school' tinted specs and catch the replay....'Nard mugged you.

Hopkins landed more quality punches, admittedly I should watch the fight again as I was pretty well lit this morning, but all I could see JC doing for the majority of the fight was missing.

BAMBI · Post by **BAMBI** » 20 Apr 2008, 11:25

Calzaggy was slapping, and swinging like a girl in the mid rounds and beyond!
Hopkins delivered some cleaner shots, but was playing up too much!

Joe C was doing some dirty silly tactics there also, what a SHYTTY FIGHT!

I was shocked that they gave it to Joe, lol..

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2008, 11:27

I suppose in his own way, Joe did make some adjustments and show mental strength. I felt he did well to get into the fight in the 4th round. We've seen Tarver and Taylor sleepwalk through those bouts with Hopkins but Joe found a home for the straight left.

I just don't see this as boxing. IMO Hopkins is bad for the sport and it was up to Joe's promoter (Warren) and trainer/manager (Enzo) to develop a more convincing style instead of feeding Joe soft touches and leaving him permanently open to right hands.

However Joe does have good instincts - he was able to draw that Hopkins lead right and avoid it from the mid rounds onward. He has a lot of self belief and persistence.

Looking over it again, I suppose there's a good case for scoring rds for Joe on workrate and cuffing/half landed shots. These two were never going to gel. But in many ways I reckon they could've prepared JC better.

There is definitely the weakness in Calzaghe's game - against tactically alert, smart defensive minded fighters. I think Mundine would have given Joe hard times if Mundine could show any fighting spirit behind the smart moves and I think - as you said Terry on BBN - Joe could have done with a fight against "Der Phantom" Sven Ottke to learn that style.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2008, 11:40

Terry D wrote:I thought Hopkins nicked it on first viewing. Better shots throughout and far more memorable. I think it he landed what you would call the more professional shots. A lot of Joe's work seemed amateurish.

That touchdown may not have hurt him greatly but it left him in two minds for at least 3-4 rounds and he was looking poor.

I thought it was a good fight. Wouldn't cry with a point or two either way. That 3rd card was a disgrace, someone obviously misread the fight when you consider the other two cards, that more than anything else galls me in boxing. Two men do a job and the 3rd makes a right arse of it.

Reminded me of Toney-Peter I. Do you like the guy hitting the other guy on the chin? Or the guy throwing more shots but not often landing the showier blows?

Credit to Hopkins, he may be a boring bastard but he said he would negate the speed and land on Calzaghe, and he did just that.

Anyone think Joe-Jones might be more competitive now, provided Jones' chin holds up? I can see Jones landing more often than Hopkins. Still, I would rather Pavlik-Calzaghe but no way does Joe get to 168 anymore.

Agree with this assessment. Hopkins also did a lot of good work in the clinches, he was rattling joe with right uppercuts and hooks on the inside.