BoxRec

gobbles wrote:

stujones wrote:Very true, all ifs buts and maybe's. I aint disputing Joe didn't have hand trouble and it didn't hamper him. However, I do think alot of the things fans put down to hand troubles was in part, due to the increase in opposition level. There seems to be a school of thought that if it was a prime Joe Calzaghe he would KO many more of his opponents later on.... nothing to really suggest that, with the possible exception of Jones - I personally believe that Kessler post Joe isn't the same fighter, and that has done somewhat a SLIGHTLY damaging affect to Joe's legacy.... but one thing he has got is a cast iron chin. Lacy also, he takes his whacks. I actually think Joe fought Lacy at the best point of his career, cause he was definately a better thinking fighter at the later end of his career. Absolute war with Brewer, one of the most underated contests in British boxing history, but Joe didn't fight smart and if Joe couldn't KO Brewer in 2002 - I don't see where he can KO Lacy at any point of his career. Well, he should have got the stoppage anyway - but I hope you get what I mean.

Not even Hamed could KO them as quickly when he stepped it up (all of the time anyway).

I think it is quite irrelevant for this conversation though, cause we are talking Bernard Hopkins here - I don't think the man as ever been hurt in his career and he has faced some muderous punchers in his time.

The Jones "fight" sadly was nothing short of a joke. Not trying to be "anti" Joe here, but that fight stank of something a little bit fishy. Between Roy just doing nothing when he had Joe hurt and then Joe standing off when Jones was out on his feet. Its not a hindsight comment, even my mates down the pub where saying somethings not right watching the 24/7. Jones' prep was play sparring with a fat mate!

So you are saying that Jones (who is still boxing and even travelling to Australia to take a fight) willingly was humiliated by Calzaghe when he could have stopped him in the first round? You have seriously strange ideas

Glyn Leach wrote:In retrospect, I think Hopkins was one of the best wins of Calzaghe's career. For anyone to beat Hopkins looks more and more impressive the longer he goes on. But I wouldn't have wanted to see a rematch — it wasn't a particularly exciting fight and, had a rematch taken place within a year of the original, I'd have fancied the result to be the same, a tight win for JC. But Hopkins has an uncanny ability to break down an opponent's style — the possibility exists that while he couldn't get it quite right first time, second time around, with the experience of the first fight in the bank, he might have been able to turn the tables. But we'll never know — and I, for one, can live with that quite happily.

observer1 wrote:

kingfinn wrote:
lol basically you've just written a rant about something you obviously have issues over - where in my above post have i put anything relating to your comments?

I said i dont think anyone would have beaten him at super middle when he was in his prime? and by all account you're agreeing with me.

The rest of your post is irrelevant to what i have written.

[Refer to Quote Below]

I was referring to comment where you said He'd beat Hopkins "at anypoint in his career". Not the SMW bit you said.

I disagree, infact i feel even Calzaghe doesn't share the same view you do. Since he stayed in the UK fighting below-par opposition, even if it meant him starving himself to make the SMW weight.




Should he have fought better opposition - yes! Should he have moved up a weight? i dont think so, he was reliant on his speed which is why he didnt move up, he was clearly slower at LH when he did.

He was never really a fast handed boxer. His asset was volume punching. He had a very high work-rate, which is what helped him. Only reason he looked slow at LH is because even an old RJJ and Old Hopkins were faster than the opposition he faced.

As i mentioned earlier, it would have suited him more at LHW if it meant he never had to starve himself to make weight, just like any other Boxer/Human Being

The fact that he didnt fight better fighters has no bearing on how good he was, he was elite.

Therefore, by that Logic, Svenn Ottke is an Elite SMW Boxer too?

If the SMW division had Froch, AA, Bute, Dirrell, Ward, Pavlik, Taylor, and kessler in it when he was at his peak - he would have beaten them all. He beat kessler when he was past his peak. He was more unlucky that it was a shit division when he was lording it. Theres also fighters that as soon as calzaghe retired suddenly started fighting at smw.

That's your opinion, , my opinion is that a few of those guys would beat Joe. Reason i say is the momen he stepped in class, even if it was small, he struggle i.e. Against a 43 year old Hopkins. Andre Ward and Direll would have had a field day with him in that case

So he was past his best when he beat Kessler? Then we can argue that Kessler had a serious Hand injury that affected both his training and performance.

kingfinn wrote:
nah disagree with you there mate. I think payne has called it right - if hopkins had come out to fight he would have lost clearly, and thats at any point in his career.

The other thing to remember is Calzaghe was a SMW not a LH and was far better SMW. The only person i think that would have ever stood a chance against a prime JC is RJJ.

And i've said it before i would have tipped JC to win at SMW and RJJ to win a LH. Many people disagree but i dont think there is any way to argue a clear victor.

But i reckon you're response is going to be along the lines of "I like Calzaghe, therefore any criticism is wrong"

stujones wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:In retrospect, I think Hopkins was one of the best wins of Calzaghe's career. For anyone to beat Hopkins looks more and more impressive the longer he goes on. But I wouldn't have wanted to see a rematch — it wasn't a particularly exciting fight and, had a rematch taken place within a year of the original, I'd have fancied the result to be the same, a tight win for JC. But Hopkins has an uncanny ability to break down an opponent's style — the possibility exists that while he couldn't get it quite right first time, second time around, with the experience of the first fight in the bank, he might have been able to turn the tables. But we'll never know — and I, for one, can live with that quite happily.

Good post, only thing I wanted to see the rematch was I think Hopkins was convinced he had the fight won. Okay, its not the first time he said this, but the body language was evident in the corner aswell (been often said the difference between Roach and Powell, Enzo was hardly coherent at this stage, was the difference in the confidence about the scoring). I just think Hopkins felt he was a mile clear and so what if he lost the last couple of rounds. Many of Joe's rounds were close.

The difference between Hopkins' other defeats and this one was that this is in reverse. Hopkins made a bright start and then faded. Against Taylor and Pascal (if you think he lost) it was a case of too little too late. Against Joe he faded, and this isn't a Hopkins trait (unlike DLH). I think Hopkins, maybe without Roach in his corner, warranted a rematch cause I do think he simply misjudged it..... and that is not according to all - Joe has said it was razor tight.

I don't think Hopkins was out on his feet, I just feel that he felt it was going his way. Tt was an unexplained subdued performance, which is not how Hopkins normally fights (in the latter stages of contests). We do have to say - for 2 of his last 3 fights he looked his age, but showed himself still to be among the finest fighters against Pascal.

observer1 wrote:Hopkins is good.
But he is 43 year old. No matter how good your skill set is, Physically, he's shown his age in his last several bouts.

Even against Pavlik, he wasn't just using tremendous work-rate, he was carefully picking his shots. He simply cannot have such a large volume with his age.

Yes he's performed well at LHW, but that's clearly not the Hopkins which reigned the MW division. He's visibility lost Work-Rate, Power and Conditioning since he moved up TWO weight classes and with AGE.

kingfinn wrote:

observer1 wrote:

kingfinn wrote:
lol basically you've just written a rant about something you obviously have issues over - where in my above post have i put anything relating to your comments?

I said i dont think anyone would have beaten him at super middle when he was in his prime? and by all account you're agreeing with me.

The rest of your post is irrelevant to what i have written.

[Refer to Quote Below]

I was referring to comment where you said He'd beat Hopkins "at anypoint in his career". Not the SMW bit you said.

I disagree, infact i feel even Calzaghe doesn't share the same view you do. Since he stayed in the UK fighting below-par opposition, even if it meant him starving himself to make the SMW weight.




Should he have fought better opposition - yes! Should he have moved up a weight? i dont think so, he was reliant on his speed which is why he didnt move up, he was clearly slower at LH when he did.

He was never really a fast handed boxer. His asset was volume punching. He had a very high work-rate, which is what helped him. Only reason he looked slow at LH is because even an old RJJ and Old Hopkins were faster than the opposition he faced.

As i mentioned earlier, it would have suited him more at LHW if it meant he never had to starve himself to make weight, just like any other Boxer/Human Being

The fact that he didnt fight better fighters has no bearing on how good he was, he was elite.

Therefore, by that Logic, Svenn Ottke is an Elite SMW Boxer too?

If the SMW division had Froch, AA, Bute, Dirrell, Ward, Pavlik, Taylor, and kessler in it when he was at his peak - he would have beaten them all. He beat kessler when he was past his peak. He was more unlucky that it was a shit division when he was lording it. Theres also fighters that as soon as calzaghe retired suddenly started fighting at smw.

That's your opinion, , my opinion is that a few of those guys would beat Joe. Reason i say is the momen he stepped in class, even if it was small, he struggle i.e. Against a 43 year old Hopkins. Andre Ward and Direll would have had a field day with him in that case

So he was past his best when he beat Kessler? Then we can argue that Kessler had a serious Hand injury that affected both his training and performance.

kingfinn wrote:
nah disagree with you there mate. I think payne has called it right - if hopkins had come out to fight he would have lost clearly, and thats at any point in his career.

The other thing to remember is Calzaghe was a SMW not a LH and was far better SMW. The only person i think that would have ever stood a chance against a prime JC is RJJ.

And i've said it before i would have tipped JC to win at SMW and RJJ to win a LH. Many people disagree but i dont think there is any way to argue a clear victor.

But i reckon you're response is going to be along the lines of "I like Calzaghe, therefore any criticism is wrong"

Honestly i just switched off after reading " i feel even Calzaghe doesn't share the same view you do", and "He was never really a fast handed boxer" - Problem with your argument is, its based on your own bizzare points of view. I browsed the rest but when you try and use my logic (incorrectly) to say that in my mind ottke must therefore be elite, i just had to think to myself this guy is really thick. Ottke didnt beat his opponents in the same manner as JC or manage the same achievements, or are you going to now tell me calzaghe struggled to beat the likes of pudwil and lacy?

Calzaghe struggled when he stepped up in class? - even thought he never lost, now you know the inside working of JC's mind. And think RJJ made calzaghe look slow in their fight ha ha ha

JC won the ring belts for both SMW and LH and was undisputed smw champion. All boxing fans know what achieving that record entails.

Hopkins was undisputed middle weight champion and moved up in weight - but avoided the smw all together. Amazing that - do boxers usually jump 2 weights at a time when theres an "over rated" undisputed champion inbetween?

hurlock wrote:i found myself giving joe rds he was shut out for 6-7rds plus the knockdown & joe must of won the last 3-4 rds. being english you dont judge fight's properly i cheered when he won but felt hopkins was the victor against a gallant joe.

stujones wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:In retrospect, I think Hopkins was one of the best wins of Calzaghe's career. For anyone to beat Hopkins looks more and more impressive the longer he goes on. But I wouldn't have wanted to see a rematch — it wasn't a particularly exciting fight and, had a rematch taken place within a year of the original, I'd have fancied the result to be the same, a tight win for JC. But Hopkins has an uncanny ability to break down an opponent's style — the possibility exists that while he couldn't get it quite right first time, second time around, with the experience of the first fight in the bank, he might have been able to turn the tables. But we'll never know — and I, for one, can live with that quite happily.

Good post, only thing I wanted to see the rematch was I think Hopkins was convinced he had the fight won. Okay, its not the first time he said this, but the body language was evident in the corner aswell (been often said the difference between Roach and Powell, Enzo was hardly coherent at this stage, was the difference in the confidence about the scoring). I just think Hopkins felt he was a mile clear and so what if he lost the last couple of rounds. Many of Joe's rounds were close.

The difference between Hopkins' other defeats and this one was that this is in reverse. Hopkins made a bright start and then faded. Against Taylor and Pascal (if you think he lost) it was a case of too little too late. Against Joe he faded, and this isn't a Hopkins trait (unlike DLH). I think Hopkins, maybe without Roach in his corner, warranted a rematch cause I do think he simply misjudged it..... and that is not according to all - Joe has said it was razor tight.

I don't think Hopkins was out on his feet, I just feel that he felt it was going his way. Tt was an unexplained subdued performance, which is not how Hopkins normally fights (in the latter stages of contests). We do have to say - for 2 of his last 3 fights he looked his age, but showed himself still to be among the finest fighters against Pascal.

The_Don1 wrote:Calzaghe beat Hopkins in the judges eyes and most of the observers eyes (apart from obersver1 that is) the only tragedy about Calzaghe's career is that he did not seek to unify the titles earlier than the Lacy fight, clearly he didn't want to go to Germany to fight Ottke (understandably so) and Ottke didn't want to come to Britan, but the WBA/WBC were up for grabs while Joe held the WBO and Ottke held the IBF.

observer1 wrote: Reason i say is the momen he stepped in class, even if it was small, he struggle i.e. Against a 43 year old Hopkins. Andre Ward and Direll would have had a field day with him in that case

Dioufy wrote:I only ever score a fight once, so I'll break that if anyone would kindly find me a good quality link to the fight?

kingfinn wrote:

Dioufy wrote:I only ever score a fight once, so I'll break that if anyone would kindly find me a good quality link to the fight?

I rewatched it last night on dvd just to see if id scored it wrong the first time, I still had it to calzaghe by two. Obviously im a calzaghe fan and a fair few of the rounds were toss em rounds, but i thought calzaghe got the nod through effective aggression.

Dioufy wrote:I only ever score a fight once, so I'll break that if anyone would kindly find me a good quality link to the fight?