Joe Calzaghe vs Bernard Hopkins - The Record Comparison

[Beatboxer]

Chris Eubank - Past his best no doubt. Also took this fight at short notice. However, to say that Eubank was shot to pieces or wasn't still a top level operator would be a downright lie. At 31, he was still in decent nick and went on to give Carl Thompson, no mug himself a good go at Crusierweight. Also, Calzaghe himself at this point was still somewhat green having been guided rather dubiously by his first promoter Micky Duff. Calzaghe, however, belied his inexperience at this level by taking it to the British legend and flooring him in the opening round. Despite some hairy moments and having to dig deep in terms of endurance and stamina, Calzaghe passed this test with flying colours, notching up an impressive win against a still very good fighter. This fight took place in 1997.

Robin Reid - Dangerous fighter. A former WBC champion and certainly in his pomp a world class operator. Some bad blood stemming from their amateur days too...Reid fought an excellent fight in this one with JC a little off form to say the least...but still he came through on a bad night with a close but clear decision in the mind of most boxing analysts. Reid would go on to have more success in the future...and in my mind should have got the decision over a certain Sven Ottke when they met in a farcial fight in I think it was 2003. A good win. This fight took place in 1999.

Omar Sheika - Hot up and coming prospect. Calzaghe had looked a bit shit in recent fights on account of chronic hand injuries that led to a lack of sparring...he realised he may be punished if not at his best in this one. Sheika had looked impressive in disposing of most of his competition, though the biggest win on his resume was the result of a contentious decision against Glen Johnson. Nonetheless, even in the context of this comprehensive defeat, he went on to prove to be a decent contender at world level in the SMW division. This was a very good win for Calzaghe and one that gave him some exposure in the US. A good solid win. This fight took place in the year 2000.

Richie Woodhall - A good text book boxer and once again a former WBC champion. Had only lost to world class opposition in Keith Holmes and also Markus Beyer. Had some moments against Calzaghe, but once again JC comprehensively did a number on him with the fight stopped in the 10th. This was the last time Woodhall ever fought. Another good win and another good name on JCs record. This fight took place in the year 2000.

Mario Veit - Undefeated up and comer. A big guy with solid boxing fundamentals, there was high hopes for this German contender. That JC blitzed this guy in one round is one his more underrated wins in my book. The guy has went on to prove what solid fighter he is, particularly a win against the dangerous Jurgen Brahmer a few years back. A good win for JC against another up and coming contender. This fight took place in the year 2000.

Charles Brewer - Former world champion and a dangerous fighter. Tough as nails, but had seen better days. Nonetheless this was a good scrap and again gave Calzaghe some exposure to the US audience. A former world champion almost always looks good on the old record too. A decent win for Calzaghe. This fight took place in the year 2001.

Byron Mitchell - Had just been beaten by Sven Ottke in a slightly contentious decision. A former world champion and very good fighter well capable of mixing it with the best. Calzaghe proved alot in terms of his heart, determination and will to win. Some say the stoppage was premature...POPPYCOCK! Mitchell was getting whacked all over the ring with a series of unanswered shots and went flying back into the ropes seemingly unable to fire back. A very impressive performance and yet another good win. Far more impressive than Das Phantom anyway in disposing of this guy. This fight agaist a top contender and only recently deposed world champ took place in 2003.

Jeff Lacy - A great win. Thats right A GREAT WIN. Calzaghe completly outboxes and humiliates one of Americas great boxing hopes. Prior to this fight people were touting Lacy for the following fights after this one: Taylor at 168 and Tarver at 175. OHHHH the Lacy Amnesia: This guy was supposed to freaking mow through Taylor(whose stock WAS high having just beaten in the minds of most objective followers of the sport long term middlweight champion Bernard Hopkins) and after that contest with the recently appointed LHW king Tarver for 175 supremacy. Those plans were laid to waste when Lacy who had destroyed a series of perenial contenders such as Pemberton, Reid and Vanderpool in a vein never seen before was humiliated in one of the best performances of this era. A great win over a hot hot prospect and the sort of beating a fighter psychologically and physically never recovers from. This fight took place in 2006.

Sakio Bika - People scoffed when this fight was made. But look a little deeper and you will see that this guy could easily have walked into this WBC champion. Proved to be a wild customer, a master of the dirty tactics to say the least. JC fought his fight and still disposed of this world level contender. A good win. This fight took place in 2006.

Mikkell Kessler - A terrifying monster of a 168lber. This guy had hardly lost a fucking round in his career and as a JC fan I feared this guy. Unwavering self belief and again disposed of top competition most efficiently and in some instances brutally. Wins over Eric Lucas, Markus Beyer and Anthony Mundine are not to be scoffed at: particularly the comprhensive nature in which he delivered them. Furthermore he showed that he was not afraid of hostile environments in the win against Mundine. That Calzaghe, now a veteran, beat this guy, the 168 heir apparent as soundly and convincingly as he did was quite some achievement in my book. I expect this to appreciate with time also but even in the unlikely event that it doesn't, a great win for JC. This fight took place in 2007.

Now, some may quibble with the achievements of the guys on this list. I won't, I believe this assortment of champions and top contenders would enhance the resume of any serious player in and around the 168 division. Taken together they represent a solid, sound record and the manner in which they were beaten makes it still more impressive. Also
look at the dates: the myth of JC only stepping it up in terms of fighting top contenders is just that a myth: he clearly fought at such a level from the word go.

Now however, the naysayers will still say where were the fights against the true elite on a par with Joe. Now let me address this. Who exactly could Joe have fought that would really have enhanced his legacy?

Sven Ottke - The obvious one. Undefeated IBF and eventually WBA champ during Calzaghes reign. Why did this fight never take place? A number of reasons. The first being that Ottke refused to even acknowledge that he knew who Joe was. Secondly, his refusal to fight outside of the safe haven of Germany where soooo many dodgy decisions were granted in his favour. FFS Reid was warned for hitting him! That this fight didn't take place was in the minds of most boxing analysts Sven Ottke's fault. For christ sake his resume, when all has been said and done is inferior to Joes. He never called out Calzaghe(unlike Joe him) and quite simply sought to avoid even talking about him. Joe cannot be blamed reasonably either for not wanting to travel to Germany. This fight would have added to Calzaghes legacy though that cannot be denied.

Roy Jones Junior - Was at 175 when Calzaghe made his way on to the world scene. Superman Roy however, back in the day before we all got a little nostalgic for him was constantly criticised for fightings shit opposition not on his level(as if anyone was) during his LHW reign. He didn't want to know about Joe...a guy with only a little American exposure...he represented all risk and no reward to this business man.

Dariuz 'Tiger' Can't spell his fucking name - Very good fighter and lineal at 175. WBO champ also. Why didn't Calzaghe fight this guy? Ill concede here: I really have no idea. As far as I know this fight was never mooted and I can't get why. Both guys suffered in the shadow of the other champion in the division....if Calzaghe stepped up and fought this guy and im sure he would have been willing and won he would have added a huge name to his record and had a basis on which he could fight Jones. This was a missed opportunity in my eyes. Calzaghe could have pushed for this.


Bernard Hopkins - My favourite. Ohhh I really love this one. Yep Bernie fans Hopkins blatantly ducked JC in order to fight Carl Daniels, Morrade Hakkar, Joppy, Allen and then a blown up Welter. Some legend. Why did he do this having agreed to the fight in 2002? On the basis that all great businessmen make decisions: risk versus reward. Who the fuck was Calzaghe to the average sports fan in the states? Sure boxing fans knew the guy and his stock was high after a series of good performances in 2000 and 2001 but would the Americans really care that much about a win over him? Did he really want to squander all that hard worked recognition after the Tito win and a few big easy paydays? Did he heck ! He thus doubled his demands just as the contracts were about to be signed and pulled out and fought Daniels that year. This would have been a huge win for JC. The undisputed MW king with recognition and plaudits galore being bestowed on him. Hopkins bottled it what can you do? Now takes the fight as an old man with plenty of ready made excuses.

[Beatboxer]

Sorry guys I had to cut big bits out due to character limits.

Including a section on Beyer an intro and a conclusion.

Hope its detailed enough if there are any blanks ask me.

Im going to do a section on Hopkins later.

Your feedback would be most appreciated.

[Beatboxer]

Also I should add: look at the dates of the fights.

Calzaghe has consistently fought at a high level. Top contenders, former champions from 1997 onwards.

It is a myth that he primarilty took on a bunch of shoddy WBO shitty contenders. A myth.

I also addressed the issue of his fellow elite. They are hardly blameless in the big fights not materializing. Infact, they are more culpable than JC. Especially in the cases of Hopkins and Ottke.

[dan-b]

I don't think you have remained particularly objective with this one Beatboxer. I bet you won't put as much effort into your Hopkins installment unless its to make him look bad.

[GazOC]

I don't think not fighting DM is a big strike against Calzaghe.

[dan-b]

I don't think not fighting DM is a big strike against Calzaghe.

Why not? It's certainly used as a strike against Jones. Joe did a lot of talking about a move to 175 & that was the most logical option. To be honest I've come to accept this is mainly a Calzaghe fan site & fully expect Beatboxer to predictably go on to tear down Hopkins. He'll also whinge about anyone who doesn't completely agree with his opinion.

I actually felt we came to a conclusion of sorts on this subject the other day but this will no doubt reopen this tired debate. I feel this will all be elementary when a 43 year old man outpoints Joe next month. Joe's career will be discredited by most of the boxing fraternity then.

[Beatboxer]

I don't think you have remained particularly objective with this one Beatboxer. I bet you won't put as much effort into your Hopkins installment unless its to make him look bad.

My main aim was to demonstrate that Calzaghe HAS fought a good solid level of competition. The only real 'lost' years were 2004 and 2005 and there was he even reasons for that what with the divorce during the Glen Johnson build up and the hand injury that scuppered Lacy in late 2005.

Fights against McIntyre and Pudwill were often sandwiched signficant bouts that added to his resume. Your assertion that he fought nothing but WBO manadtory bums is ridiculous. There was a few, I won't deny that and I do think certain fights might have forced the hands of guys like Hopkins and Jones by balancing out the risk-reward ratio somewhat but Calzaghe has fought a strong level of competiton. Comparable at the very least to Hopkins.

I seek to demonstrate that later. Hopkins will get credit where hes due and he deserves a damn lot of it don't worry about that.

[Beatboxer]

Why not? It's certainly used as a strike against Jones. Joe did a lot of talking about a move to 175 & that was the most logical option. To be honest I've come to accept this is mainly a Calzaghe fan site & fully expect Beatboxer to predictably go on to tear down Hopkins. He'll also whinge about anyone who doesn't completely agree with his opinion.

I actually felt we came to a conclusion of sorts on this subject the other day but this will no doubt reopen this tired debate. I feel this will all be elementary when a 43 year old man outpoints Joe next month. Joe's career will be discredited by most of the boxing fraternity then.

I agree with you in regards to DM.

This fight to me is totally logical. Both had trouble convincing the 'other' champs in their divisons from fighting them for a variety of reasons. Why not take on each other? A win for each would have been very signficant...could have also increased the pressure of messers Jones and Ottke to step up.

[dan-b]

I agree with you in regards to DM.

This fight to me is totally logical. Both had trouble convincing the 'other' champs in their divisons from fighting them for a variety of reasons. Why not take on each other? A win for each would have been very signficant...could have also increased the pressure of messers Jones and Ottke to step up.

This is the thing that annoys me about Joe, I really do think he could have beaten DM & easily knocked out Ottke. I do think a lot of this was to do with ****** but then a man of Joes talent should have walked.

As for the WBO thing. I would never describe a fighter as a bum & I have also never said he fought nothing but WBO mandatories. It is annoying how he often faced fighters after his German counterpart though. Mitchell's WBA belt could have been Joes.

[Beatboxer]

This is the thing that annoys me about Joe, I really do think he could have beaten DM & easily knocked out Ottke. I do think a lot of this was to do with ****** but then a man of Joes talent should have walked.

As for the WBO thing. I would never describe a fighter as a bum & I have also never said he fought nothing but WBO mandatories. It is annoying how he often faced fighters after his German counterpart though. Mitchell's WBA belt could have been Joes.

The DM case is one that puzzles me. It never seems to have been mooted at all and I can't for the life of me think why. Isn't there some rule that the WBO champ of the division below can automatically move up and get a shot at the champ of the division above? Isn't this what DM did with his brief venture to Cruiser?

None of the two ever seem to have mentioned this fight. It puzzles me...why not? They both have always had a big name in Europe so if the big names in the States weren't willing to play ball why not fight against each other? Baffling.

In regards to the Mitchell case....there does seem to be a lull between Joes last fight in 2002 and his sole fight in 2003. I believe he attributed this to injuries in his book ill have to have a read again. Im too young to fully remember that period as it was happening as I only became a serious fan when I was 15 in 2003 so its not something I remember happening. Ottke fought Mitchell in this lapse and was wholly unconvincing in this victory. Also, Joe was loyal to the WBO belt and I don't think the major sanctioning bodies allowed unfication with it until a certain DLH and Hopkins came together to unfiy at 160. DM was stripped of his titles which Jones subsequently picked up because he refused to drop his WBO strap I know that much. Naz had similar issues.

[GazOC]

Why not? It's certainly used as a strike against Jones. Joe did a lot of talking about a move to 175 & that was the most logical option. To be honest I've come to accept this is mainly a Calzaghe fan site & fully expect Beatboxer to predictably go on to tear down Hopkins. He'll also whinge about anyone who doesn't completely agree with his opinion.

I actually felt we came to a conclusion of sorts on this subject the other day but this will no doubt reopen this tired debate. I feel this will all be elementary when a 43 year old man outpoints Joe next month. Joe's career will be discredited by most of the boxing fraternity then.

The big difference between Jones and Calzaghe was that Jones was fighting at 175 at the same time as DM. I have no problem whatsoever with any boxer (Hopkins included) staying at the weight they are most comfortable at.

I don't think this is a Calzaghe 'fansite' but it is a British forum so I guess you're going to get some bias on the subject. I'm pretty sure Calzaghe will beat Hopkins but he won't get any credit due to Hopkins' age, the week after the fight the general forum will be full of "Calzaghe is ducking Dawson" threads.

[dwilson]

Very good thread Beatboxer. I have been waiting for you to post it, I thought you may have forgot.

Anyway Im a non Calzaghe fan and even chose to support Kessler during the last fight but I will be cheering JC on against Hopkins. Who has built a career on boring fights against mostly mediocre opposition. The JC vs Hopkins fights is tough one to call.

[dan-b]

The DM case is one that puzzles me. It never seems to have been mooted at all and I can't for the life of me think why. Isn't there some rule that the WBO champ of the division below can automatically move up and get a shot at the champ of the division above? Isn't this what DM did with his brief venture to Cruiser?

None of the two ever seem to have mentioned this fight. It puzzles me...why not? They both have always had a big name in Europe so if the big names in the States weren't willing to play ball why not fight against each other? Baffling.

In regards to the Mitchell case....there does seem to be a lull between Joes last fight in 2002 and his sole fight in 2003. I believe he attributed this to injuries in his book ill have to have a read again. Im too young to fully remember that period as it was happening as I only became a serious fan when I was 15 in 2003 so its not something I remember happening. Ottke fought Mitchell in this lapse and was wholly unconvincing in this victory. Also, Joe was loyal to the WBO belt and I don't think the major sanctioning bodies allowed unfication with it until a certain DLH and Hopkins came together to unfiy at 160. DM was stripped of his titles which Jones subsequently picked up because he refused to drop his WBO strap I know that much. Naz had similar issues.

Yes there is indeed a rule like that. I think most sanctioning bodies accomodate champions from the lower division stepping up. As for the WBO unification thing. Freitas held WBA/WBO titles simultaneously way before Hopkins did.

[GazOC]

The DM case is one that puzzles me. It never seems to have been mooted at all and I can't for the life of me think why. Isn't there some rule that the WBO champ of the division below can automatically move up and get a shot at the champ of the division above? Isn't this what DM did with his brief venture to Cruiser?



DM wouldn't leave Germany, Calzaghe wouldn't leave the UK. They were both happy enough making money defending on their home turf.

[Beatboxer]

Yes there is indeed a rule like that. I think most sanctioning bodies accomodate champions from the lower division stepping up. As for the WBO unification thing. Freitas held WBA/WBO titles simultaneously way before Hopkins did.

Ahh yes I believe it was the IBF and WBC that were funny with it. I remember debates on the matter back in 2003 etc on this board.

I must add however, that almost all of the belts, whilst a good way of distinguishing the top fighters and contenders of any given division have their flaws. They are all guilty of nonsensical mandatories that often contradict the other that leads to the division become un-unified even after a fighter works hard to get all the belts.

I don't rate any of the major sanctioning bodies to be higher than the other. They are all guilty of bullshit.

[dan-b]

The big difference between Jones and Calzaghe was that Jones was fighting at 175 at the same time as DM. I have no problem whatsoever with any boxer (Hopkins included) staying at the weight they are most comfortable at.

I don't think this is a Calzaghe 'fansite' but it is a British forum so I guess you're going to get some bias on the subject. I'm pretty sure Calzaghe will beat Hopkins but he won't get any credit due to Hopkins' age, the week after the fight the general forum will be full of "Calzaghe is ducking Dawson" threads.

Yes but Joe himself admitted he was struggling to make weight, a claim Hopkins never made. So to say he was comfortable, by his own admission, is untrue.

I think I've been painted as a Calzaghe hater on this site, an image I've probably helped perpetuate, but it's not the case. I just haven't turned him into some demigod on the basis of a few wins like others have. I'm not saying any of you lot have done this but there are fanboys who have probably only seen five Calzaghe fights.

[GazOC]

I don't rate any of the major sanctioning bodies to be higher than the other. They are all guilty of bullshit.

No argument there. A good matchup is a good matchup irrespective of belts.

[Beatboxer]

Very good thread Beatboxer. I have been waiting for you to post it, I thought you may have forgot.

Anyway Im a non Calzaghe fan and even chose to support Kessler during the last fight but I will be cheering JC on against Hopkins. Who has built a career on boring fights against mostly mediocre opposition. The JC vs Hopkins fights is tough one to call.

Yea man I hadn't forgot about it. University just been really getting on top of me and I finally finished some pesky course work yesterday. Then I decided I would make this thread and give it the due consideration it deserves.

Ill be doing Hopkins later. Ill state right here and now that I believe whilst Calzaghes legacy is underrated, Hopkins is overrated. That is not to say Hopkins is rubbish or anything - it isn't. Its a very good solid resume but not so much that it transcends Calzaghe - they are infinetly comparable in my mind in terms of the fighters they have beaten.

Ill go into more depth later.

[Beatboxer]

Yes but Joe himself admitted he was struggling to make weight, a claim Hopkins never made. So to say he was comfortable, by his own admission, is untrue.

I think I've been painted as a Calzaghe hater on this site, an image I've probably helped perpetuate, but it's not the case. I just haven't turned him into some demigod on the basis of a few wins like others have. I'm not saying any of you lot have done this but there are fanboys who have probably only seen five Calzaghe fights.


I agree. Ive been on this site alot longer than my join date suggests. And trust me from 2003-2005 this site was anything but Pro-Calzaghe. The fairweather fans and fanboys came out the wall from March 2006 onwards for obvious reasons.

[dan-b]

Ahh yes I believe it was the IBF and WBC that were funny with it. I remember debates on the matter back in 2003 etc on this board.

I must add however, that almost all of the belts, whilst a good way of distinguishing the top fighters and contenders of any given division have their flaws. They are all guilty of nonsensical mandatories that often contradict the other that leads to the division become un-unified even after a fighter works hard to get all the belts.

I don't rate any of the major sanctioning bodies to be higher than the other. They are all guilty of bullshit.

Look we've done the alphabet debate to death. My main reason for wanting to ignore the WBO is simply because if we don't in a few years we'll be having the same debate about the IBO. The WBA did stop Naz unifying with the WBO though when he fought Wilfredo Vazquez.

[Beatboxer]

DM wouldn't leave Germany, Calzaghe wouldn't leave the UK. They were both happy enough making money defending on their home turf.

Yes but I never even remember a mention of it. This is the one thing I hold against JC. Its clear the Americans weren't up for it and the Ottke case is well documented but DM is a different beast. Couldn't a comprimise have been made? Its a big fight in European terms. I know you don't hold it against them on account of being in different divisions but I do sense a lost opportunity here.

[GazOC]

Yes but Joe himself admitted he was struggling to make weight, a claim Hopkins never made. So to say he was comfortable, by his own admission, is untrue.

I think I've been painted as a Calzaghe hater on this site, an image I've probably helped perpetuate, but it's not the case. I just haven't turned him into some demigod on the basis of a few wins like others have. I'm not saying any of you lot have done this but there are fanboys who have probably only seen five Calzaghe fights.

JC was always complaining about the weight, his book is full of it, but he still managed it for years after a mooted DM fight failed to materialise so he must have been reasonable OK at 168, he's has a few tough 12 rounders since then that would have shown up any weight making problems.. I think he's just one of those type of fighters who likes a moan, bad hands, poor motivation, weight etc...

[Beatboxer]

Look we've done the alphabet debate to death. My main reason for wanting to ignore the WBO is simply because if we don't in a few years we'll be having the same debate about the IBO. The WBA did stop Naz unifying with the WBO though when he fought Wilfredo Vazquez.

You could be right if Ricky Hatton has his way!

Did you hear him the other week on Sky Sports? :rofl

I think thats a bit drastic as well. I can't be arsed getting into it but its doubtful that any alpha soup shit will get serious recogntion in the next few years.

As you've said its been to death so perhaps another day but not now.

[brown bomber]

gr8 work bb

[brown_bomber]

hopkins fought the better opposition compared to calzaghe who fought absoulte jack shit opposition his whole career apart from a past it eubank and kessler, lacy was nothing but a overhyped shitface

[dan-b]

hopkins fought the better opposition compared to calzaghe who fought absoulte jack shit opposition his whole career apart from a past it eubank and kessler, lacy was nothing but a overhyped shitface

Don't post unless you are willing/able to converse like an adult.:good

[Beatboxer]

hopkins fought the better opposition compared to calzaghe who fought absoulte jack shit opposition his whole career apart from a past it eubank and kessler, lacy was nothing but a overhyped shitface

Wow thats me told :lol:

Anyway cheers for the feedback and any kind words guys.

Ive got a load of stuff do to right now but I should be back later to do a Hopkins analysis. I also promise that I will be as objective as I can be given my position on this matter :p

[dan-b]

Wow thats me told :lol:

Anyway cheers for the feedback and any kind words guys.

Ive got a load of stuff do to right now but I should be back later to do a Hopkins analysis. I also promise that I will be as objective as I can be given my position on this matter :p

No problem mate thats all we can ask.:good

[mattress]

So is Calzaghe going to get some respect if he beats Hopkins? Or will it be the same old story of the opposition being 'too old' or 'hyped', etc??

[kurt2006]

They have both fought similar opposition but JC has been done more schooling.

For me the Lacy fight was the best performance by JC. He totally shut out Lacy and poor old Lacy has not been the same since.

[mattress]

For me the Lacy fight was the best performance by JC. He totally shut out Lacy and poor old Lacy has not been the same since.

And you know what 'they' all said about Lacy.....after the fight, of course.

[kurt2006]

And you know what 'they' all said about Lacy.....after the fight, of course.

Yes I know, but the same people did not say it before the fight when they were projecting Lacy as if he was a mini Mike Tyson.

JC seriously damaged Lacy, poor guy has not been the same since. After the schooling he lost all his confidence and looks like a broken man. I doubt Bhops has managed to do that to anyone.

[Beatboxer]

Yes I know, but the same people did not say it before the fight when they were projecting Lacy as if he was a mini Mike Tyson.

JC seriously damaged Lacy, poor guy has not been the same since. After the schooling he lost all his confidence and looks like a broken man. I doubt Bhops has managed to do that to anyone.

It could be argued that he 'executed' the careers of Felix Trinidad and especially up and comer Joe Lipsey.

[dan-b]

Hopkins aint Lacy. Joe will get his credit.

[kurt2006]

Hopkins aint Lacy. Joe will get his credit.

I doubt it, people going to say Hopkins was an old man and past his prime.

[Haye]

Why not? It's certainly used as a strike against Jones. Joe did a lot of talking about a move to 175 & that was the most logical option. To be honest I've come to accept this is mainly a Calzaghe fan site & fully expect Beatboxer to predictably go on to tear down Hopkins. He'll also whinge about anyone who doesn't completely agree with his opinion.

I actually felt we came to a conclusion of sorts on this subject the other day but this will no doubt reopen this tired debate. I feel this will all be elementary when a 43 year old man outpoints Joe next month. Joe's career will be discredited by most of the boxing fraternity then.

Yeah but Jones was in the same division.

[kurt2006]

It could be argued that he 'executed' the careers of Felix Trinidad and especially up and comer Joe Lipsey.

Yes but FT was a natural welterweight. Lipsey was not exactly mixing it with the best before he met Bhops.

[dan-b]

I doubt it, people going to say Hopkins was an old man and past his prime.

Some will but you cant change the world sadly.

Yeah but Jones was in the same division.

We already discussed that bit. It's done.


One thing I do know is that Joe should quit trying to trash talk. He's rubbish at it & it's not his game. He's been quoted as saying some clearly scripted shit about Hopkins being a dog. Errrr...yeah Joe, stick to the boxing.

[scurlaruntings]

They have both fought similar opposition but JC has been done more schooling.

For me the Lacy fight was the best performance by JC. He totally shut out Lacy and poor old Lacy has not been the same since.The Lacy fight saddened me.I never wanted to see JC vs Lacy simply because Joe was too well schooled for a basic slugger like Jeff.Jeff has the right attitude and said the right things on his quick rise through the rankings.But the reality was he had way too much smoke blown up his ass, people were comparing him to Tyson!!! :roll: And he actually thought he was that good after listening to all his fans and yes men. The reality was he didnt even have a jab no head movement, loaded up on all his punches and ANY decent box puncher at 68 would stand him on his head. Remember even a shot Omar Sheika gave him trouble.

Joe at the top of the tree was simply the worst guy to pick because Lacy was as green as grass. I fear now his another David Reid who`s star burnt brightly too quickly and has already faded.

His team should have realised his deficiencies and pulled him out of that fight when Joe was really hurting him. He simply walked in and took a beating for 12 rounds and was completely incapable of defending himself. Pretty sad as with the right tutelege and guidance Lacy could have made some noise and been a quality main stay.Now is struggling with guys like Manfredo.He was a fighter that needed to brought along careful.But yanks typically love a home town hero and they trust him into a spot light that he was just not ready for.

[mattress]

43 not too old for you ffs:patsch

Are you saying Hopkins is too old? Before the fight? I am expecting that excuse if Calzaghe wins.

[JonOli]

Are you saying Hopkins is too old? Before the fight? I am expecting that excuse if Calzaghe wins.


Its more a fact rather than an excuse...

[mattress]

Its more a fact rather than an excuse...

That he's 43 or that he's too old? I'll say one thing for Hopkins, you will not find a 43 year old in better condition and you can go anywhere in the world. That's a testament to his dedication to the sport and undoubtedly to the luck of possessing the genes he does. Hopkins keeps shocking us all with his exploits at his age but I am sure it will catch up with him soon. I just hope it's against JC!:D

[Diablo]

I dont think age can be used as an excuse when it comes to Hopkins. He is an exception to the rule and you only have to look at his last couple of fights to see hes still at a very high level.

[Beatboxer]

The revisionists will use his age as an excuse.

Just like in hindsight suddenly Lacy was overhyped. Ditto Kessler.

[dan-b]

The revisionists will use his age as an excuse.

Just like in hindsight suddenly Lacy was overhyped. Ditto Kessler.

I'll do no such thing should the worst happen unless it really is suddenly apparent Hopkins is shot which is unlikely. Lacy was overhyped though & I've never seen the big deal with Kessler. Kessler is a good solid fighter, nothing more.

[Beatboxer]

I'll do no such thing should the worst happen unless it really is suddenly apparent Hopkins is shot which is unlikely. Lacy was overhyped though & I've never seen the big deal with Kessler. Kessler is a good solid fighter, nothing more.

He had two of the titles you regard so highly. The two most signficant historically.

Perfect record hardly lost a round in his career. Beat a series of good high level fighters very convincingly. Achieved more at SMW than Trinidad did at 160 thats for certain.

Its a very good win. As is Lacy.

[scurlaruntings]

The revisionists will use his age as an excuse.

Just like in hindsight suddenly Lacy was overhyped. Ditto Kessler.Age is a factor here though irrespective of revisionism. Lacy was CERTAINLY overhyped because of US fan boys and not enough was known about Kessler other than a glittering record prior to his loss to JC. Either way Joe can only beat the guys infront of him and fiinally his established his dominance at 68. As for a victory over Hopkins although the bout is worthy of the attention and media clamour its probably too little too late. When history looks at the win loss column for both a win for Hop will always have more value than a win for Joe.

[Beatboxer]

Age is a factor here though irrespective of revisionism. Lacy was CERTAINLY overhyped because of US fan boys and not enough was known about Kessler other than a glittering record prior to his loss to JC. Either way Joe can only beat the guys infront of him and fiinally his established his dominance at 68. As for a victory over Hopkins although the bout is worthy of the attention and media clamour its probably too little too late. When history looks at the win loss column for both a win for Hop will always have more value than a win for Joe.

Lacy was on the exact same level as Jermain Taylor. The difference? Calzaghe destroyed his heir apparent with ease whereas Hopkins was defeated by his. Twice.

Who else could Lacy and Kessler have beaten to prove their status? They were the top contenders in the division at the time both undefeated and both highly heralded.

When Joe proposed moving up in 2004 to LHW people were saying that he was running scared of these two up and coming hit kids in the division. Why after they both became champions and Calzaghe faced them does he not get the credit he deserves? Its ridiculous.

Look at the second part of my comparison. I give Hopkins full credit for all that he achieved up until 2001 and gauged it. The achievements are simply on the same level as Calzaghes. From 2002-2004 he killed time waiting for a big money pay off with DLH rather than vigorously pursuing legacy enhancing matches with Calzaghe and RJJ.

[scurlaruntings]

Cant agree. If you look at there styles Taylor is a box puncher with a sound jab. Lacy was just a slugger. Hopkins would have done exactly the same and stood him on his head. ANY box puncher including Taylor beats Lacy with relative ease. Lacy was brought along very quickly and gifted a title vs Vanderpool. Lacy had the look the crowd pleasing style and the killer instinct but he WAS a flawed fighter.

[dan-b]

He had two of the titles you regard so highly. The two most signficant historically.

Perfect record hardly lost a round in his career. Beat a series of good high level fighters very convincingly. Achieved more at SMW than Trinidad did at 160 thats for certain.

Its a very good win. As is Lacy.

Yes thay did achieve more at that weight class but Trinidad was the better fighter without a shadow. Lacy is not even in the same league.

[Beatboxer]

Cant agree. If you look at there styles Taylor is a box puncher with a sound jab. Lacy was just a slugger. Hopkins would have done exactly the same and stood him on his head. ANY box puncher including Taylor beats Lacy with relative ease. Lacy was brought along very quickly and gifted a title vs Vanderpool. Lacy had the look the crowd pleasing style and the killer instinct but he WAS a flawed fighter.

So is Taylor. Very flawed. He just had the style to give Hopkins fits. Taylor might dispose of this psychologically damaged version of Lacy but 2004-2005 Lacy? Im not so sure.

To say that any boxer puncher beats Lacy in the manner that Calzaghe did is a stretch at best.

[Beatboxer]

Yes thay did achieve more at that weight class but Trinidad was the better fighter without a shadow. Lacy is not even in the same league.

Trinidad is a legend. I gave Hopkins great credit for that win. Some might debate it, but it was huge at the time. Just like Lacy, not many saw it coming they are comparable wins in that sense.

It seems crazy now but most though Tito would stop Hopkins! Again revisionists downplaying the signficance of a win in hindsight. It seems nuts but Hopkins would have got more credit from the naysayers if he was put on his arse 3 times in the first 5th and 6th before coming back to stop Tito rather than the clinic he actually produced!

Thats how illogical boxing fans are at times.

[scurlaruntings]

So is Taylor. Very flawed. He just had the style to give Hopkins fits. Taylor might dispose of this psychologically damaged version of Lacy but 2004-2005 Lacy? Im not so sure.

To say that any boxer puncher beats Lacy in the manner that Calzaghe did is a stretch at best.Agreed Taylor is flawed. He only rose through the ranks quickly because he was the best of a very thin crop. Taylor is a good fighter.But not a GREAT fighter.He doesnt have the tools to be a true elite. BUT he is a very good listener and a hard worker and will do what is asked of him.

And i stand by my point on Lacy. Watch Lacys fight with Sheika. Watch his fight with Syd Vanderpool. Lacy doesnt possess a jab and simply isnt busy enough in the ring. He prefers to stalk his opponents walk them down and only looks good against static targets. Sheika who can be drawn into a war at will, gave him a torrid time as he was simply far more busier than Lacy. Even in the 2nd round Sheika stunned Lacy and Lacy immediately clinched and stopped throwing.His trainer even admonished him and said your not punching back your not moving your head. And thats EXACTLY what he did vs Joe. As soon as he got hit hard he stopped punching back and stopped throwing and simply copped a beating.

[Beatboxer]

Agreed Taylor is flawed. He only rose through the ranks quickly because he was the best of a very thin crop. Taylor is a good fighter.But not a GREAT fighter.He doesnt have the tools to be a true elite. BUT he is a very good listener and a hard worker and will do what is asked of him.

And i stand by my point on Lacy. Watch Lacys fight with Sheika. Watch his fight with Syd Vanderpool. Lacy doesnt possess a jab and simply isnt busy enough in the ring. He prefers to stalk his opponents walk them down and only looks good against static targets. Sheika who can be drawn into a war at will, gave him a torrid time as he was simply far more busier than Lacy. Even in the 2nd round Sheika stunned Lacy and Lacy immediately clinched and stopped throwing.His trainer even admonished him and said your not punching back your not moving your head. And thats EXACTLY what he did vs Joe. As soon as he got hit hard he stopped punching back and stopped throwing and simply copped a beating.

This is a formidable argument. Ive not seen those fights for years but I do particularly remember him having a bit of a tough time with Sheika...though that was overshadowed by the twin destructions of Reid and Pemberton.

May I ask you however, how much credit you will give Calzaghe should he defeat Hopkins ?

[scurlaruntings]

This is a formidable argument. Ive not seen those fights for years but I do particularly remember him having a bit of a tough time with Sheika...though that was overshadowed by the twin destructions of Reid and Pemberton.

May I ask you however, how much credit you will give Calzaghe should he defeat Hopkins ?Sheika was hitting him with LEAD right hands. That shows how easy Jeff is to hit. I loved Jeffs look attitude and style but the facts are he was way to flawed as a fighter and certainly not good enough to beat Joe on ANY day of the week. As for the Reid fight i dont know wether id call it a destruction. Lacy was a bit wild and not that accurate with his punches. They were more like clubbing blows and Reid simply gave up and wilted but complained bitterly about the stoppage. To be fair both fighters by the time they fought Lacy had seen much better days.Even Manfredo put Pemperton away with ease. Pemperton only got lots of air time because of his wars with Sheika.

If Joe beats Hop again very good win but in terms of historical value its too little to late. Hop has more to win purely because of his age than Joe.

[Max Molyneux]

Cant agree. If you look at there styles Taylor is a box puncher with a sound jab. Lacy was just a slugger. Hopkins would have done exactly the same and stood him on his head. ANY box puncher including Taylor beats Lacy with relative ease. Lacy was brought along very quickly and gifted a title vs Vanderpool. Lacy had the look the crowd pleasing style and the killer instinct but he WAS a flawed fighter.

No way, Hopkins doesn't have the workrate to beat Lacy like Joe did although I agree he would win a decision.

[Beatboxer]

Sheika was hitting him with LEAD right hands. That shows how easy Jeff is to hit. I loved Jeffs look attitude and style but the facts are he was way to flawed as a fighter and certainly not good enough to beat Joe on ANY day of the week.

If Joe beats Hop again very good win but in terms of historical value its too little to late. Hop has more to win purely because of his age than Joe.

I agree with your point that Hopkins has more to gain. People will whether I or others on this board, like it or not, cite Hopkins age as a factor in him losing, rightly or wrongly.

That it has happened at this stage is of course not exactly Calzaghes fault. Hopkins was the one who agreed to the fight before unreasonably doubling his demands just as it was about to happen in 2002...when Calzaghe had a little momentum at that time no less.

I am, however happy that its at least happening now even if Calzaghe still doesn't get the credit I feel he deserves after this one. He can't win anyway, if he fought and beat Dawson a load of people would say Dawson had only beaten Adamek overhyped prospect etc.

[dan-b]

I agree with your point that Hopkins has more to gain. People will whether I or others on this board, like it or not, cite Hopkins age as a factor in him losing, rightly or wrongly.

That it has happened at this stage is of course not exactly Calzaghes fault. Hopkins was the one who agreed to the fight before unreasonably doubling his demands just as it was about to happen in 2002...when Calzaghe had a little momentum at that time no less.

I am, however happy that its at least happening now even if Calzaghe still doesn't get the credit I feel he deserves after this one. He can't win anyway, if he fought and beat Dawson a load of people would say Dawson had only beaten Adamek overhyped prospect etc.

Take solice in the fact that fighters generally become appreciated after their retirement. Hopkins career comes under a fair amount of scrutiny as well remember & not just by JC nuts.

How many more fights do you think JC will have should he emerge triumphant? Do you think he'd retire if he lost?

[Beatboxer]

Take solice in the fact that fighters generally become appreciated after their retirement. Hopkins career comes under a fair amount of scrutiny as well remember & not just by JC nuts.

How many more fights do you think JC will have should he emerge triumphant? Do you think he'd retire if he lost?

1 or 2. Yep I believe he would retire if he lost...he seems very set on retirement after this year in any case.

I see him fighting Woods for sure should he come through against Tarver. If he fails, a fight against Pavlik is wholly possible. If Tarver wins and faces off against Dawson(which I believe is the plan) then the clamour to fight the winner of that might see him have one more outing.

Bascially, its hard to say at this point. All will become clear following those two weeks in April.

[dan-b]

1 or 2. Yep I believe he would retire if he lost...he seems very set on retirement after this year in any case.

I see him fighting Woods for sure should he come through against Tarver. If he fails, a fight against Pavlik is wholly possible. If Tarver wins and faces off against Dawson(which I believe is the plan) then the clamour to fight the winner of that might see him have one more outing.

Bascially, its hard to say at this point. All will become clear following those two weeks in April.

Hold the phone. If Johnson upsets Dawson & Tarver beats Woods does that mean we have to watch Johnson Tarver again?:cry:

Where does Danny Green fit into all of this?:lol:

[Beatboxer]

Hold the phone. If Johnson upsets Dawson & Tarver beats Woods does that mean we have to watch Johnson Tarver again?:cry:

Where does Danny Green fit into all of this?:lol:

I certainly hope not! It would make a perverse kind of sense though...they are 1-1!


Danny Green? Fuck knows :lol: I think he wants to fight Paul Briggs in an Aussie derby fight anyway...his credibility is a little lacking from his days at 168...with Beyer and Mundine of course recording victories over him.