Which was more brilliant?

nonsense

Bernard Hopkins didn't fight like that in his prime... the negative style came afterwards

 

The byrd fight was competitive. Some people (clowns obviously) even had Evander winning.

Not saying that either of Valuev and Oquendo are great, but they were decent top 10 Hw when Holyfield fought them (even if it was in a putrid era)

 

Calzaghe never avoided Hopkins. Hopkins never avoided Calzaghe. There wasn't any mandate for the two to fight because they were in different weight classes. When they did actually fight, Calzaghe beat him clearly unless you watched the fight from Hopkins' asshole.

<TABLE style="BORDER-RIGHT: #aaaaaa 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #aaaaaa 1px solid; BACKGROUND: #f9f9f9; FLOAT: right; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; BORDER-LEFT: #aaaaaa 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #aaaaaa 1px solid; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse; TEXT-ALIGN: center" cellPadding=3 border=1><TBODY><TR style="BACKGROUND: #e9e9e9"><TH>Total Punches </TH><TH>Hopkins </TH><TH>Calzaghe </TH></TR><TR><TD>Landed </TD><TD>127 </TD><TD>232 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Thrown </TD><TD>468 </TD><TD>707 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Pct. </TD><TD>27% </TD><TD>33% </TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND: #e9e9e9"><TH>Jabs </TH><TH>Hopkins </TH><TH>Calzaghe </TH></TR><TR><TD>Landed </TD><TD>11 </TD><TD>45 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Thrown </TD><TD>93 </TD><TD>224 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Pct. </TD><TD>12% </TD><TD>20% </TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND: #e9e9e9"><TH>Power Punches </TH><TH>Hopkins </TH><TH>Calzaghe </TH></TR><TR><TD>Landed </TD><TD>116 </TD><TD>187 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Thrown </TD><TD>375 </TD><TD>483 </TD></TR><TR><TD>Pct. </TD><TD>31% </TD><TD>39% </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

Never said that Joe ducked Hopkins. Only that he would never fought him in his prime, as he was too happy fighting bum after bum in Europe.

ANd who cares about punch stats, this isnMt amateur boxing

 

mIKE's entire boxing mindset is based on amateur boxing and it's scoring system

 

It wasn't competitive. Here is some info from an article that was very favorable to Holyfield: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/boxing-news/Byrd-vs-Holyfield-Result.php

However, note the title of the article which summed up how most felt after that fight ("The End Of A Legendary Career")

Punch Stats
Holyfield Byrd
102 Landed 252
344 Thrown 747
30% Percentage 34%
Jabs
Holyfield Byrd
3 Landed 154
37 Thrown 525
8% Percentage 29%
The Judge’s Scores were:
Eugene Grant – 116-114 for Byrd
John Steward – 117-111 for Byrd
Steve Weisfeld – 117-111 for Byrd
I had it 117-112 – for Byrd​

 

It's "its", not "it's".

You won't be able to keep up so this is for everyone else who cares...

mY mindset isn't about am boxing's scoring system, it's about clean punching, effective agression, defense, and ring generalship all combined and all viewed through the lens of "who would you rather be?"

Am boxing scoring (when done correctly) tends correlate with "who would you rather be" most of the time, but it is a different system with different objectives. One of the primary objectives of the am boxing scoring system is to take away the subjectivity in scoring that lets people pretty much pick the fighter they want to win without having to justify it. It is far fairer than the pro boxing scoring system in the sense that it is harder to screw the deserving fighter out of a win.

Bringing punchstat into this...sure, it's not the end-all, be-all, but when a fighter is outlanded 2-1 or 2.5 to 1 in a round, then there better be some very good arguments as to why you would rather be that fighter rather than the guy doing all of the landing. Absent knockdowns or huge disparities in power, the guy doing all of the landing almost surely is the deserving winner of a round and generally that translates into the deserving winner of the fight.

 

no, no, no

when at least half of calzaghe's punches are pitty-pat flurries, punch stats mean SHIT

He just managed to win that fight, essentially through outworking Hopkins... those ridiculous numbers of yours would make it seem a landslide... this is of course preposterous to anyone with eyes and the ability to score a PROFESSIONAL boxing match

it's was a typo, don't be a faggot

 

Weak. You know exactly what I am talking about. The part of your post that I pointed out by making the text bold. And, of course, the part that you are avoiding now because, once again, you posted without knowing what you were talking about.

"His losses to Tiberi and Johnson came AFTER the jones fight and so are irrelevant when talking about Jones' achievement on that particular night."

Getting something wrong isn't the end of the world (and you REALLY should be getting used to it by now), but it is pretty amusing watching you try to avoid your way out of your fact-defying statement.

 

I admitted my error up above. but by all means continue your tirades... :egypt:

 

No tirade here. You asked what facts you screwed up on and I told you because you were acting like you didn't know what I was talking about.

Same old, same old from you here.

 

calzaghe very clearly defeated hopkins. that was a decisive win.

 

:Lok::Lok::Lok::Lok:

another gem

 

Eat some prunes. It will help.

 

Unfortunately, there is no help for you.