Joe C Nearing The End

[Tykemania]

[Also, I can't see Calzaghe going back down in weight. Now that he's been at 175 he won't go back down. Strange really, as Joe seems better as a lean and mean super middle but he won't subject his body to it again.

I'm not so sure - if he does genuinely want a last hurrah he won't, but if he has any thoughts of another 18 months in the ring then it makes far more sense for him to go back down:

1. He could still fight RJJ - Jones has already said he could make the weight and was only two pounds off for the Tito Trinidad fight.

2. There would be more legacy in winning at LH then going back down than in staying in a division where he may not be able to match the very best young fighters.

3. The biggest money match ups may well be at super middle - I can't see Taylor or Pavlik (or Miranda for that matter) going all the way up to 175, though Froch might.

[Autobarn]

I think Joe would go back down for Pavlik.

The big question is, can Arum make Pavlik a big star in time? Pavlik will want a big time dance partner and if Abraham gets smashed or robbed vs Miranda (rematch in Florida) then middleweight is a wasteland for Kelly. Can Pav's fights with Lockett and Rubio raise him into superstar potential? Only if a lot of ppl see him absolutely decapitate them. Pav has KO'd all the good challengers while he was on the way up (Zertuche, Zuniga, Miranda) as a contender! Arum's attempts to manufacture a big fight - Duddy & Lee - backfired miserably. The fight can be made for can Kelly be big enough before Joe retires? Because Kelly's only PPV fight didn't do that well.

[Zhuge]

I think it would be foolish to fight Pavlik. The guy is big, boxes decently, and hits extremely hard. Why take such a risk at 36, when RJJ and Tarver likely bring more money to the table?

[Tykemania]

I think Stu's outlook is very fair. Calzaghe's greatest prime opponent to date is Kessler. Much as I like and respect Mik, he wouldn't have been considered as someone beyond Euro-class ten years ago.

Joe didn't fight Toney, Jones, Hopkins, Ottke, Reggie or Glen Johnson, Griffin, Rocchigiani or Francis. There was plenty of quality opposition out there during the 'wilderness' years. Now there's to be no Pavlik, Froch, Bute or Erdei...

Okay, I'm afraid I'm going to pitch in on the other side here - whilst I agree with Stu's point that there is no way on earth Joe would have beaten a pre-heaveyweight Roy Jones, neither would Hopkins or, for that matter, pretty much anyone else. Ever.

Hopkins on his best day versus Calzaghe on his? I don't think thats one that anyone could call with confidence - at super middle, and with his speed and combinations, I still think Joe would be the slight favourite, but no more than slight. In saying this, I bear in mind that the quality of opposition on Hopkins record is not much better than on Joe's - he got annihalated by Jones, beaten twice by the distinctly average Jermain Taylor and was lucky to get a draw in his first fight with Segundo Mercado - his win over Johnson was undoubtedly impressive, but the remainder of his "big name" wins were either against blown up welterweights (De La Hoya, Trinidad), light middles (Wright) or weight drained part timers (Tarver)... remember, Hopkins didn't fight Toney, Reggie, Ottke et al either!

[stujones]

I think Stu's outlook is very fair. Calzaghe's greatest prime opponent to date is Kessler. Much as I like and respect Mik, he wouldn't have been considered as someone beyond Euro-class ten years ago.

Joe didn't fight Toney, Jones, Hopkins, Ottke, Reggie or Glen Johnson, Griffin, Rocchigiani or Francis. There was plenty of quality opposition out there during the 'wilderness' years. Now there's to be no Pavlik, Froch, Bute or Erdei...

Okay, I'm afraid I'm going to pitch in on the other side here - whilst I agree with Stu's point that there is no way on earth Joe would have beaten a pre-heaveyweight Roy Jones, neither would Hopkins or, for that matter, pretty much anyone else. Ever.

Hopkins on his best day versus Calzaghe on his? I don't think thats one that anyone could call with confidence - at super middle, and with his speed and combinations, I still think Joe would be the slight favourite, but no more than slight. In saying this, I bear in mind that the quality of opposition on Hopkins record is not much better than on Joe's - he got annihalated by Jones, beaten twice by the distinctly average Jermain Taylor and was lucky to get a draw in his first fight with Segundo Mercado - his win over Johnson was undoubtedly impressive, but the remainder of his "big name" wins were either against blown up welterweights (De La Hoya, Trinidad), light middles (Wright) or weight drained part timers (Tarver)... remember, Hopkins didn't fight Toney, Reggie, Ottke et al either!

Agree with the first paragraph whole heartedly... Jones is a different level to the other two prime for prime.

Second paragraph... I would have agreed with (although I would have gone with BHOP) - prior to Saturday. Saturday for me though showed prime for prime. Hopkins was a different animal and would have won decisively. Sure, you can say Joe was out of his weight class and beyond his best - but he aint near as far gone as Hopkins.

Hopkins now is only a part time fighter, in his 44th year, and very limited in the way he can fight (cause of his punch output so much reduced) and still, in the eyes of a fair few, beat Joe.

Joe might have been better in 2003 than he is now... Hopkins... different animal.

Why does William Joppy's name always get eliminated from the list of Hopkins greatest wins.... not only is Joppy one of the better opponent, but it was such a clinical display. It was a masterclass.

[Tykemania]

[Second paragraph... I would have agreed with (although I would have gone with BHOP) - prior to Saturday. Saturday for me though showed prime for prime. Hopkins was a different animal and would have won decisively. Sure, you can say Joe was out of his weight class and beyond his best - but he aint near as far gone as Hopkins.

Hopkins now is only a part time fighter, in his 44th year, and very limited in the way he can fight (cause of his punch output so much reduced) and still, in the eyes of a fair few, beat Joe.

Joe might have been better in 2003 than he is now... Hopkins... different animal.

Why does William Joppy's name always get eliminated from the list of Hopkins greatest wins.... not only is Joppy one of the better opponent, but it was such a clinical display. It was a masterclass.

I don't see that you can necessarily correlate their performances on Saturday with how the fight would have gone with both at their absolute peak - there are simply too many imponderables, of which I mention just a few:
- the knockdown; this clearly shook JC for two to three rounds and threw the scoring off in BHop's favour. Assuming Joe at his peak, I doubt he'd have been so lax.
- Spoiling - the only argument I've seen for Hopkins to have won the fight was that he stopped Joe working and landed a few telling blows. At his peak, we assume he'd have been a little less blatant and would have been pegged repeatedly as he engaged. If you go for the other argument - namely that he'd have fought the same fight - then he hasn't deteriorated at all, he is still as good a borderline cheat as ever.
- Refereeing - I think we have to assume such a fight would also have a referee at their peak. Hopkins may well have been DQ'd!

I would also question your assertions that this was a close decision - I just don't see how, even with Cortez lending a hand - and that Hopkins was so radically better five years ago. As for Joppy, I thought about including him, but had a look back at his record and saw little to be inspired by; lets face it, its a bit worrying when Howard Eastman is your biggest win!

[stujones]

Of course Hopkins has deteriorated.... it was around the 8th round of this fight when Hopkins was mouth open and guard lowering.

He only won one and had one level on my card after that.... and others think Calzaghe sweeped it.

Trying to say that Hopkins wasn't gassing? or that he would have fought like he did in the last 4-5 rounds back in 2001-2003.

All Hopkins would have done differently is back up Joe a bit more when he landed the telling punches, the ones that snapped Joe's head back... as he did in the opening three all the time, and the next 3 some of the time. He would have sustained it for 12 rounds no doubt, it wasn't a particularly great pace.... but still enough to gas the 2008 version of Hopkins.