I agree with this but 1. Jones wouldn't have paid him what he wanted to be paid and deserved to be paid...those were the Square Ring days. 2. Roy didn't pull up roots when it came to making fights against guys like DM or Joe Cal.Under Roys terms, I can see why they just said fuck it and made their money in Europe. 3. Joe WAS trying to get the fight with Hopkins as early as 2003, a lot of people don't accept or even know this.
I never said Calz avoided Hopkins. I just said that prime-for-prime, Hop would have beaten him. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Calz even ADMITTED that he wouldn't beat a young Jones.
Yeah Calzaghe did say Jones was the one guy he was scared of during his prime. He didn't say that about Hopkins though, he was always confident he would beat him, as was I, shame Bernard was such a bitch.
3 fight deal, giving up Oscar/Jones/Tito fights etc :goingmad: He would have lost millions and millions of dollars taking that fight
Yup, Calzaghe in his book said he wouldn't have beaten a prime RJJ. That fight was never going to happen; RJJ himself said that Joe 'wasn't even on his radar' then. MTF
I am NOT getting dragged into this again, but this is getting ridiculous; the mythical list of opponents Hopkins fought instead of the Calzaghe three fight deal gets better and better with every passing day. Jones? :laughing: How did avoiding a Calzaghe fight in 2003 get Hopkins a fight with Jones? For the record, after Hopkins turned down an agreement to fight Hakkar, Calzaghe and A.N Other, he instead fought Hakkar, Joppy and Robert Allen. Then he fought Oscar. Then he fought Howard Eastman. The Tito fight was two years BEFORE he turned down Calzaghe's offer to fight him. The Jones fight was SEVEN years later. But let's not let pesky facts get in the way of Calzaghe hatred. It's much better to say that Hopkins needed to renege on his agreement to fight Joe to fight a guy two years beforehand and seven years afterwards. MTF :Steve-Dave/MMA::Steve-Dave/MMA:
The Tito, Jones & Oscar fights were all concrete possibilities in >late 2002<, when the contract was offered. I know you're not denying that so, I'm not sure what conversation there even is to have on this. Regardless, he ended up landing the most lucrative of the three WITHIN A YEAR & made more in one night than he would in the whole 3 fight contract with showtime, so he made the right choice.
Basically he took on three easy fights and instead of facing Calzaghe he took on Joppy. If it's such a walkover why didn't he just take the Calzaghe fight which would have made him more money as part of the three fight deal? It would have been held in the States too.
How as a Tito fight a solid possibility in late 2002? They had already fought in 2001. There were no discussions with RJJ in late 2002- Roy was campaigning two divisions higher and was about to fight Ruiz for a HW title. To say that Hopkins skipped a Calzaghe fight because he was planning to fight, or was in realistic discussions to fight, Roy or Tito is a flat out lie. If you want to say that he skipped a Calzaghe 3-fight deal to fight Oscar, then fine. I will criticize him for taking a much easier fight against an non-middleweight purely for money instead of taking very good, if lesser money, for fighting a genuine threat near both of their respective primes. I would also point out that Hopkins STILL fought three fights before the Oscar fight so he could have taken the Calzaghe 3-fight deal and still fought Oscar eighteen months down the line. Instead of Hakkar, Calzaghe and another, he fought Hakkar, Joppy and Allen. He did NOT make more money from that deal than he would have if he'd taken the Calzaghe deal instead. In both circumstances, the Oscar fight could/would have been next. Hopkins gets a big pass for avoiding Calzaghe in late 2002/early 03 so that he could fight Oscar in late 2004. Strange that. MTF
Tell 'em Feebs. As I said, if it was such a piss easy fight for Hopkins then he could have just taken it and made some easy wonga.
I think its a close fight, honestly. Joe's hand speed and workrate would always be problematic for the methodical approach Hopkins had. Could go either way IMO. Roy Jones on the other hand would clearly beat Joe. And if he doesn't stop him, he'd definitely hurt him a few times en route to a decision.
How many professional boxing matches did you take part in? It's real easy for someone who never did it to sit here and talk trash
