Hopkins is a great, and Calzaghe isn't

Hopkins makes history and all of the Calzaghe fans are saying Calzaghe's CV "looks even better".

Please don't take the shine off Hopkins' win.

Calzaghe's lucky SD doesn't mean anything.

Pro boxing is scored on clean punching, effective aggression, ring generalship and defence. There is just no way Hopkins lost to Calzaghe. We all know what happened, Calzaghe refused Hopkins a rematch in Wales and then retired on a 12 round slapfest against the shot Jones.

Congratulations to Hopkins.

A true great of the modern era.

Weirdly enough I touched on this view a second ago.Still a Calzaghe apologist but wow, does this make Joe's career look a bit lacking ,or what.

Hopkins lost against Calzaghe, get over it.

You've gotta remember Calzaghe wasn't at his prime against Hopkins.

I would say there both greats.

Calzaghe was school by Hopkins.

why do people critizie calzaghe so much. we would all like every fighter to face the opposition at the peak of there primes, but sadly it doesnt work like that. you can only beat who is infront of you.

Eddy, there are ,in my mind, legit criticisms of Joe ,for example he was content to coast on his WBO belt for nearly a decade, passing up opportunities to fight the legends because of poor paycheques,and not travelling out of the UK till his last few bouts.
Find it a bit of a poser however that anyone would give Popkins the decision over Joe, let alone still care about the result right now!

maybe, but for me he was undefeated, had a few good name wins over respected opponents as well as few over the hill names (jones, hopkins etc) i will admit but i think he was ignored by the US for the large part of his prime and thats why we only got these fights a little to late.

Why do people keep saying Hopkins was over the hill?

He wasn't he schooled Tarver, beat Wright and schooled Pavlik.

okay past his best, over the hill is the wrong word- no deny he is (still) an dangerous opponent.

Let's compare Calzaghe to other Brits from the same era:

Hatton's first big superfight came against lineal champ Tszyu in 2005. Let's not forget that Tszyu was the lineal champion at jr. welter from November 2001 to June 2005 when he lost to Hatton. During these years, he was ranked as a top-10 pound-for-pound fighter and in '04 he was ranked no.3 behind (1) Hopkins and (2) Mayweather.

He then unified against Maussa who was a top-10 ranked light-welter at the time.

He then moved to welterweight and beat Collazo for the WBA championship. Collazo was a top-5 ranked welterweight at the time.

He returned to jr.welter and won another championship (against Urango).

He made a name for himself in America and proactively chased a fight with the best fighter in the world who was a weight above him. Fair enough, he was outclassed - but Hatton showed great heart to pursuit the fight against Mayweather. It seems the fight took a lot of Hatton.

He then returned to jr. welter and beat another top-10 ranked contender in Lazcano before his destruction against Pacquiao. But once again, he actively took on the biggest fight and went over to the States to make it happen.

Compare that to Calzaghe who won the vacant title in '97 and then waited until '06 to unify! Hello!?

Then compare him to David Haye.

And don't even mention Carl Froch - a guy who puts Calzaghe's record to shame.

Hitmansam-why the aggrieved agenda?

Out of 21 championship fights at super-middle, a mere 5 of the 21 opponents were top-10 Ring rankes super-middleweights. Warren was feeding Calzaghe top-50 WBO contenders and Calzaghe was happy to oblige.

Look at who Hopkins has fought: Pascal x2, a young Jones Jr., Pavlik, Tarver, Winky Wright, Taylor x2, De La Hoya, Trinidad, Keith Holmes, and Glen Johnson - a guy Calzaghe blatantly ducked.

Look at Froch's resume: Dirrell, Pascal, Kessler, Taylor, Abraham, Johnson next....and then Ward..

Calzaghe = not bad, but defo not great.

Strange obsession with the man and his record I must say

Hopkins should give Pascal a rematch. Jean gave him one he could of vacated and stepped down or moved on, the young lion deserves a rematch. Hopkins is brilliant but talks way too much, Bute next? gimme a break the guy's a fraud, Pascal should move back to 12 stone and destroy Bute, he would wipe the floor with him.

Steven_89 wrote:Hopkins should give Pascal a rematch. Jean gave him one he could of vacated and stepped down or moved on, the young lion deserves a rematch. Hopkins is brilliant but talks way too much, Bute next? gimme a break the guy's a fraud, Pascal should move back to 12 stone and destroy Bute, he would wipe the floor with him.

The WBC ordered a rematch I believe.

Hopkins has essentially beaten Pascal twice now so I dont see there being any unfinished business or why a third installation is neccessary.

The WBC ordered a rematch I believe.
............
Yeah, which is why i said he could of moved on. Pascal won the first fight imo, he outfought him and dropped him numerous times, he should fight Pascal again, he is more deserving than Bute who's a fraud.

The first fight was a draw, that's why there was a rematch. Hopkins won clearly last night and should move on.

And this really isn't a good time to have a go at Calzaghe, who must be laughing his ass off.

Don't think there's any need for a rematch, Pascal was comfortably beaten yesterday and was very fortunate to get a draw in the first fight. Hopkins isn't going to prove anything by beating him again.

And this really isn't a good time to have a go at Calzaghe, who must be laughing his ass off.
..............................
I think he should be ordered to fight Pascal again, i thought Pascal won the first fight clearly. Who's laughing at Calzaghe i was over the moon when he beat this racist idiot lol!, Super, Super Joe Super Joe Calzaghe!

The first fight was close and could have gone either way but it was in no way a clear win for Pascal who was being outboxed for large portions of the fight.

Calzaghe was good at what he did; high workrate and decent speed. The casual fan is seduced by the undefeated record and biased media. But there's too much to dislike if you ask me. He couldn't turn his punches and often slapped. His fans say he must have slapped hard but that doesn't hide the fact he still slapped. He lacked flair and a clinical approach - he wasn't accurate or a great finisher. A bit wild if you ask me. Look at his stoppages - most of them were hometown stoppages.

Carl Froch puts the guy to shame.

Steven_89 wrote:And this really isn't a good time to have a go at Calzaghe, who must be laughing his ass off.
..............................
I think he should be ordered to fight Pascal again, i thought Pascal won the first fight clearly. Who's laughing at Calzaghe i was over the moon when he beat this racist idiot lol!, Super, Super Joe Super Joe Calzaghe!

I thought Hopkins schooled Pascal first time around, and it took both joke reffing and joke scorecards to score it a draw. Last night Hopkins proved that he is simply better than Pascal, and should now move on.

Such a bitter man, why not just savour a great performance by Hopkins instead of spouting your usual anti Calzaghe propaganda?

Calzaghe was good at what he did; high workrate and decent speed. The casual fan is seduced by the undefeated record and biased media. But there's too much to dislike if you ask me. He couldn't turn his punches and often slapped. His fans say he must have slapped hard but that doesn't hide the fact he still slapped. He lacked flair and a clinical approach - he wasn't accurate or a great finisher. A bit wild if you ask me. Look at his stoppages - most of them were hometown stoppages.
..............................
I thought Hopkins edged their fight (Hopkins v Calzaghe) but was buzzing Calzaghe won, Hopkins is a racist thug and a disgrace in my eyes. Good fighter, horrible man.

froch lost to kessler and calzaghe beat him, not saying that proves he's better but shows calzaghe does deserve more credit than he gets

Steven, I think that is tainting your view of the first fight mate....stop the mock righteousness, please

@eddyfightfan
Pascal is twice the fighter Kessler is though, as are Taylor, Dirrell who Froch beat. Froch beat the better opponents, but Calzaghe beats him imo

Steven, I think that is tainting your view of the first fight mate....stop the mock righteousness, please Wink
......................
No, i dont like racist irate idiots who have been to jail, i said i thought he won the fight i'm not tainted by anything, glad Calzaghe won though, has more heart in his gymbag than Hopkins. Also rolling around on the floor wound me up, he talks a good game, fight don't lay down, fight.

Kessler is the best of them lot and is definitely a better win than either Taylor or Dirrell

Steven_89 wrote:@eddyfightfan
Pascal is twice the fighter Kessler is though, as are Taylor, Dirrell who Froch beat. Froch beat the better opponents, but Calzaghe beats him imo

How did Froch lose to Kessler then?

Calzaghe had to slap because of his hand troubles right?

He adapted his style to overcome an obstacle. Im not his biggest fan, but I cant really blame him for his punching technique.

How did Froch lose to Kessler then?
.......................
Sorry i forgot it was that easy, Pascal would destroy Kessler and has done a lot more, he beat an unbeaten champ in Diaconu twice, destroyed the Ring champ in Dawson, and was the Ring champ himself. Why did Khan lost to Prescott but beat Maidana? who's much better, Styles make fights

Kessler was a better win at the time than Pascal was for Froch, he may have gone to do those things but that wasn't the fight who was beaten.

Calzaghe will never be considered a true great and that's that. There's no doubt he was good but so were the likes of Ottke and Dariusz M. It's not difficult to stay undefeated when you're fighting the Woodhalls and Reids. Calzaghe is Wales' national treasure and I understand that, but some of the UK fans are worse than than Pac's fans - many of whom know nothing about boxing.

How can anyone ignore that out of 21 opponents at super-middle, ONLY FIVE were top-10 contenders at the time Calzaghe beat them? That's 16 opponents out of the top-100 WBO tomato cans.

An SD over Hopkins isn't career-defining - ask Taylor. Hopkins was vocal in that he was willing to travel to Wales for the rematch. Calzaghe opted for Jones Jr. Calzaghe apologists argue that their first fight wasn't entertaining but Calzaghe was more than willing to fight in Germany against Veit for a second time round.

That's why Hopkins is content. He knows deep in his heart that he beat Calzaghe. Much like Marquez does with Pac.

But Pac has the guts to fight again - unlike Calzaghe.

How can anyone be so obsessed they end up talking to themselves?

Calzaghe put together a decent career. He beat some decent opponents and had some great nights. But, didn't really take on lots of top class opposition and that will probably stand against him to some degree. This is not uncommon for British or European fighters, perhaps we are a little insular. Calzaghe vs Reid is a major fight over here, who needs to travel overseas. Even Eubank and Benn (a couple of fights perhaps) didn't challenge many of the top fighters in the world.

I'm not sure if one bout aids another fighter's record, styles make fights. Calzaghe didn't beat Pascal or Pavlik himself. If anybody will be happy its Jermaine Taylor, first of the modern era to defeat Hopkins and did so twice. The fight against Calzaghe was at least controversial and many have awarded the fight to Hopkins. Some judges prefer workrate and Hopkins's ring antics didn't help, so controversial. But, at the end of the day a record stands on its own merits, beating a great fighter doesn't necessarily make a fighter great.

At least the likes of hitmansam will ensure Calzaghe is not forgotten.

Hopkins beat Pascal to become the oldest ever champion, but more importantly, the big story of the day is that Joe Calzaghe wasnt actually great.......

Steven_89 wrote:Steven, I think that is tainting your view of the first fight mate....stop the mock righteousness, please Wink
......................
No, i dont like racist irate idiots who have been to jail, i said i thought he won the fight i'm not tainted by anything, glad Calzaghe won though, has more heart in his gymbag than Hopkins. Also rolling around on the floor wound me up, he talks a good game, fight don't lay down, fight.

More mock righteousness..who is safe from your fury .. Just Joe? Well he snorts coke, nails mingers and is a plank....is that not as bad as being irate and having been to jail??

On a moral level it quite clearly isn't as bad as going to jail but gives a damm what a fighter does outside the ring

Imperial Ghosty wrote:On a moral level it quite clearly isn't as bad as going to jail but gives a damm what a fighter does outside the ring

My point exactly...none of these guys are saints..

Hopkins turned his life around pretty well to be fair. He visits prisons now to speak to inmates about getting their lives back on track. Ive read a few things about him and the kind of work he involves himself in which seem to show him as a pretty decent guy, albeit with a sketchy past.

I dont believe he is a racist either.

Me neither . I think it's a comment which has been pounced upon by the PC brigade with relish..

Imperial, you're a closet Calzaghe fan and I've exposed you for that before so I couldn't give a flying fig what you have to say.

Hopkins did well and full credit to him. Calzaghe says "I don't do rematches" unless your name is Mario Veit.

Hopkins was willing to travel to Wales and school him again. Calzaghe foughgt his "swansong" against Jones Jr.

Coward.

Oh no i'm a Calzaghe fan but that still allows me to be objective unlike you who seems to think it's more important to slag off Calzaghe rather than simply praise Hopkins for an impressive win

Steven_89 wrote:Calzaghe was good at what he did; high workrate and decent speed. The casual fan is seduced by the undefeated record and biased media. But there's too much to dislike if you ask me. He couldn't turn his punches and often slapped. His fans say he must have slapped hard but that doesn't hide the fact he still slapped. He lacked flair and a clinical approach - he wasn't accurate or a great finisher. A bit wild if you ask me. Look at his stoppages - most of them were hometown stoppages.
..............................
I thought Hopkins edged their fight (Hopkins v Calzaghe) but was buzzing Calzaghe won, Hopkins is a racist thug and a disgrace in my eyes. Good fighter, horrible man.

A thug? Interesting.

Also a racist. Please. Weren't you the one who said the supported some of what the BNP say and do? Stones and greenhouses and all that.

Minter was called a racist for what he said before the Hagler fight so Hopkins should and deservedly was also called a racist

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Minter was called a racist for what he said before the Hagler fight so Hopkins should and deservedly was also called a racist

Minter was called a racist because he was a member of the NF (or so I read somewhere).

Incorrect he was supported by the NF who were out in force that night against Hagler, they started to support him vigourously after his pre fight comments. They were no worse than what Hopkins said before the Calzaghe fight, both proved themselves to be racist in my view.