The Calzaghe-Hopkins - No! Thread

Matt W · Post by **Matt W** » 06 Nov 2007, 12:46

I think some of the comments here re: the legitimacy of Hopkins as an opponent are way wide of the mark. Yes, he's past his best but he is still beating the world's best fighters. This isn't the same as say, Evander Holyfield.

Hopkins is still a huge scalp, regardless of his age.

J · Post by J » 06 Nov 2007, 12:46

ill be shouting for hopkins.

he may well yet find a way to win. you never know with Nard.

Matt W · Post by **Matt W** » 06 Nov 2007, 12:49

stujones wrote:I wouldn't mind Hopkins vs Joe - aslong as that wasn't his Joe's final fight. He would have to finish off by fighting Dawson. Forget Woods, he's lost too many times to ever be considered the Heir apparent. Dawson is the one that most people predict will reign for a long time after the Hopkins/Calzaghe generation is finished with.

If Calzaghe beats Dawson would he be written off the way Lacy has been?

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 06 Nov 2007, 13:00

Thought Joe would beat Hop 3 or 4 years ago, which is why I reckon BH priced himself out of it. No way can he cope with that workrate and speed. And he's not going to beat Joe now.

Sounds like he might be interested now, as a pension cheque maybe, but no doubt he'll be absolute hell in negotations, demanding 2 or 3 mill probably.

Still, there's not a lot of places to go for Joe now, and some of the American writers seem to think JC goes to P4P #1 if he beats Hop. It'll be a big event I suppose, though not a fight that's going to set the world on fire by a long shot.

Better than Joe taking on the pretty average Woods though, which is a fight that will do absolutely nothing for his legacy.

Taylor moving up would be a good one.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 06 Nov 2007, 15:30

overhand_right wrote:The Ring title is irrelevent. Hopkins is The Man becausehe beat The Man, regardless of alphabet strippins & machinations.

How exactly did 0-2-1 Woods end up IBF champ whilst Tarver and Johnson were rightly battling it out for Undisputed title?

Like it or lump it, Calzaghe v B-Hop will be an NYC SPECTACLE and huge news in this country, and JC will be AUTHENTIC LIGHT-HEAVY CHAMP.

would Tarver have been the man though if he'd had to fight Adamek, Briggs and Woods, after beating Johnson? Tarver was gassing badly in fights and flailing.

Hopkins was great beating Tarver but he didn't show he had too much vs Wright.

Woods has looked world class and won a great fight vs Johnson, so i think Clinton deserves it personally. He's a strong, old fashioned grind 'em down fighter and I like watching him fight.

I think these British rivalries really come to life when they're made. But definitely, it seems like it's Yank time now. I might root for Taylor to beat Pavlik if it means him taking on Joe next.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 06 Nov 2007, 16:11

KO Artist wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:I'm with everyone on this, but I think it's as inevitable as death and taxes.

I'd rather he fought Clinton, but understand that economically it's not as big.

If as Hopkins says, they could fillo Yankie Stadium (could they though), then there's a lot of money out there for this fight.
Would you go to see it James?

No way!

I would watch it from the comfort of home on PPV, with the proviso that I am shitfaced by the time it starts. I would expect a dull fight and would probably not be dissapointed.

The only hope of excitment would be Calzaghe hammering the old man into the canvas, but that is incredibly unlikely.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Nov 2007, 17:39

Matt W wrote:
stujones wrote:I wouldn't mind Hopkins vs Joe - aslong as that wasn't his Joe's final fight. He would have to finish off by fighting Dawson. Forget Woods, he's lost too many times to ever be considered the Heir apparent. Dawson is the one that most people predict will reign for a long time after the Hopkins/Calzaghe generation is finished with.
If Calzaghe beats Dawson would he be written off the way Lacy has been?

I suspect he'll be "written off" the way Kessler has been. I suppose it would be down to the manner of the performance and victory. If Joe dominates in the manner he did vs Lacy, then of course there will be an arguement that Dawson wasn't as good as the likes of Bika, Brewer, etc. However, unlike Lacy - Dawson has beat a geniune legitmate title holder (not no vacant title) and did it in style (not a struggle, like Lacy had).

Dawson has looked everybit as good as Kessler.

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 06 Nov 2007, 18:01

Joe:- "Froch is a boring fighter, with a shit defence.."

If so, why not take the £2m of sky money before a summer showdown in the yankee stadium ?

I dont think a fight with Clinton Woods will be that spectacular im sorry to say..

Calzaghe WILL fight again once before Hopkins i'm sure... purely because the yankee stadium is full of rain / snow til March usually i think.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Nov 2007, 18:21

Clinton Woods would have been an excellent legacy fight if Joe wasn't 35 and with time ticking - certainly better than 3/4 of his title defences. However, Woods is pushing on too now and if Joe wins easy then I am sure the critics would say Clinton was over the hill. However, Woods has already been exposed as a good, but never top rung, world champion. So in that instance - I can think of a fair few better fights. Dawson, Hopkins, Erdei, Bute, Pavlik, Abraham are certainly better - and I would say even Froch... cause at least with Carl we don't know yet his level - we do Clinton's.

I would say of all the ones championing a fight with Joe, the only one whose defensive qualities Joe can criticise is Carl's.

Grilling Machine · Post by **Grilling Machine** » 06 Nov 2007, 18:54

stujones wrote:There has been NO mention of Chad Dawson yet...

Look upthread. Yeah, Dawson and Froch are the most exciting opponents for me (unknown quantities like you say). I'd bet good money he fights neither though, because it's potential danger with relatively scant reward. People would just say: "Oh, so Dawson/Froch WAS overhyped, after all."

And if Joe lost, then it'd be: "Calzaghe was beaten by non-champions, so his record must be based on careful fight selection. Prime Jones and Hopkins..." He accepts Bernard, rakes in great retirement money and the Americans finally respect him. That's the likely outcome.

Edit: well, maybe not the last bit about US respect.

E · Post by E » 06 Nov 2007, 19:15

What I find odd is how Americans always say that foreign opponents should come to the US to prove themselves...why???

Just so the US fighters can have home advantage and not suffer any time difference?

Good US fighters rarely go abroad, and this gives them a significant advantage.

I don't think Roy JOnes ever fought out oif the US. Hopkins fougt once out of the US andonly drew. Antonio Tarver - all his fights in the US.

I'm sick of this prejudice about having to prove yourself in the US - what so you fight at a significant disadvantage.

Joe's a bit of a homeboy I admit, but still defended his title in his opponents's back yard (germany) and also fought in Denmark. And you could argue that he fought in England plenty of times when he is Welsh. (a bit spurious I know.)

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Nov 2007, 19:33

E wrote:What I find odd is how Americans always say that foreign opponents should come to the US to prove themselves...why???

Just so the US fighters can have home advantage and not suffer any time difference?

Good US fighters rarely go abroad, and this gives them a significant advantage.

I don't think Roy JOnes ever fought out oif the US. Hopkins fougt once out of the US andonly drew. Antonio Tarver - all his fights in the US.

I'm sick of this prejudice about having to prove yourself in the US - what so you fight at a significant disadvantage.

Joe's a bit of a homeboy I admit, but still defended his title in his opponents's back yard (germany) and also fought in Denmark. And you could argue that he fought in England plenty of times when he is Welsh. (a bit spurious I know.)

It does grate a bit, but unfortunately someone has to fight at home - it would be completely daft to see RJJ vs Joe in Spain for example and unfortunately America has the tradition of being the boxing capitol of the world and where the money is.

Barry McGuigan (and he should know) claims that the American's tend to fight 10% better on their home patch than on their travels. The performances of travelling vs home based American's (of similar levels) vs Naz would bring a testament to this. That it is why it is seen as such a great achievement. In an ideal world would the Brits like to travel... No, neither would the yanks. Unfortunately, money dictates and the yanks win that battle.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 06 Nov 2007, 22:10

When people discuss legacies they like to point to other great fighters on the record.. George Forman, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier are three names of seriouse fighters at the time.

No one will be convinced a fighter is great with Clinton Woods's name on his record. If he unified 175 fair enough but otherwise Hopkins is "the man" at light HW he is also a fighter who has a well recognised name and done seriouse things at middleweight.

I hear there was previously talk of the winner of Taylor Pavlik fighting hopkins, if the winner of that takes the winner of this match it also clears up the question of Hopkins being beaten.

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 07 Nov 2007, 08:23

jimcook wrote:id rather see carl froch against hopkins! i know calzaghe can make tons of money and cement his legacy etc,and good luck to him..he deserves it,but..this fight has zero relevance...hopkins is well past his best.this is not a fight for boxing fans...its a cynical moneymaking excercise and nothing more. and in all probability would be boring. theres a good argument for creating a seniors boxing tour..round up your toneys,delahoyas,hopkins,mcullochs,barrerras etc and put them on the merrygoround...but keep them away from real boxing,unless they are gonna fight the young up and cummers..otherwise theyre not contributing to boxing,just bleeding it dry for their extended testimonials

Absolutely right.

chesh · Post by **chesh** » 07 Nov 2007, 10:04

The plus side of a Calzaghe-Hop fight could be a solid undercard. One would assume it would be a Golden Boy-SN co-promotion on HBO PPV. Golden Boy are starting to put on decent undercards (DLH-PBF was awful, but Cotto-Mosley and PBF-Hatton look pretty good) and it could provide an ideal showcase for Enzo Mac and AAA, ideally in fights against top opponents. Joe gets big bucks and the others get US TV exposure. Just a thought, but I'm not a promoter!

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 07 Nov 2007, 10:10

How about USA vs Great Briton on July 4th if Calzaghe gets another fight in there in the middle!

Flav1 · Post by **Flav1** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:14

I'd absolutely love to see Calzaghe go Bute then Pavlik/Taylor. If he won both those he'd go down in history and they'd both make him his dough. Hopkins is a more a waste of time the more I think about it.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:21

This is a bit like Lennox vs. Tyson. Lennox had to fight Tyson, otherwise some jerks would always have said he had ducked Mighty Mike. Although Tyson wasn't competitive any more by the time they fought. And of course it was a nice payday for LL.

J · Post by J » 07 Nov 2007, 11:22

pundit wrote:This is a bit like Lennox vs. Tyson. Lennox had to fight Tyson, otherwise some jerks would always have said he had ducked Mighty Mike. Although Tyson wasn't competitive any more by the time they fought. And of course it was a nice payday for LL.

can see similarities and such but hopkins is far more live than tyson was.
Write him off at your peril.

Flav1 · Post by **Flav1** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:32

I'll write him off against Calzaghe

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:55

Flav1 wrote:I'll write him off against Calzaghe

That would be dumb the thing is I think Calzaghe would win but he's certainly not a prohibative favorate.

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:56

It would definately be one for the purists, more chance of seeing a KO at a Sunday morning football match. I'd definately prefer to see him face Froch, Bute, Mundine, Woods..... but Calzaghes understandably looking for a good pension from the sport, him and Frank are mentioning £$£$£$£$'s at every possible opportunity and the wonga is in the US.

It will be a massive fight and considering some of Calzaghes previous opponents we really shouldn't be complaining. I hope the fight takes place at 175

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:56

Stumbling block already? Warren says Calzaghe is the draw. This hints strongly that Joe should get the better money.

Warren also says there's somethin going round about a Hopkins-Wright rematch and that Prozac should sponsor it, LOL

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 07 Nov 2007, 11:58

Autobarn wrote:Stumbling block already? Warren says Calzaghe is the draw. This hints strongly that Joe should get the better money.

Warren also says there's somethin going round about a Hopkins-Wright rematch and that Prozac should sponsor it, LOL

Calzaghe - Froch it is then

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 07 Nov 2007, 12:01

Chambers2 wrote:
Autobarn wrote:Stumbling block already? Warren says Calzaghe is the draw. This hints strongly that Joe should get the better money.

Warren also says there's somethin going round about a Hopkins-Wright rematch and that Prozac should sponsor it, LOL
Calzaghe - Froch it is then

Hope so.

If Froch KO's Reid in spectacular fashion, it would be more likely,, IMO.