He's clearly clowning Calzaghe in the trash talking department. I think Hopkins will surprisingly dominate Joe. He has never failed to deliver on his trash talking, not even in the Taylor fights IMO:: From Fightnews.com Light heavyweight champion Bernard Hopkins has issued a release saying he has taken the news of Joe Calzaghe's rebuttal to his training team statement as a sure sign of panic. "This poor guy used up all the air in his boxing gym to spew a bunch of nonsense about nothing really. I said what I had to say in one breath. He knows what he is up against on April 19 and that's all that has to be said. All those words are just like his punches - nothing on them and no damage done."
hopkins is a mean guy. won't really matter in the ring tho. he's in against a great fighter who matches in size.
WTF is 117-111?? 9-3?? Is there a round limit on dominate? Now if you think Hopkins wins only three rounds...just wow. Although I wouldn't be surprised to see some judge give him three rounds. But I doubt it. This one will be close and I wouldn't be surprised to see the old master give Joe C. the shock of his life. This ain't Mikkel Kessler and it damn sure isn't Jeff Lacy.
Calzaghe will win clearly. That old man feint-and-throw-20-punches-a-round scam aint gonna work here.
Prepare to be amazed, my good man, for Joe will win 4 rounds and then some. Bernard is a tough, crafty, dirty campaigner who eats Southpaws for breakfast generally but he is 40-odd years old. Calzaghe, on the other hand, is quite possibly at the peak of his powers. Whilst I can well imagine Bernard slowing Joe down considerably compared to his usual output, he won't be able to slow him down enough. And if he tries to get inside and spoil, Joe will mix it right back, throwing plenty of uppercuts, using the head where required and generally roughing Bernard up. People underestimate just how tough and strong Joe is, simply because his punches generally come in flurries. He is a tough SOB. I wouldn't buy into this 'smack talk' business. Joe is a typical British boxer- he can't smack talk for shit. He just yabbers on, adding a variety of sentence fillers ('You know', 'well', 'basically' et al) all over the place to 'puff out' his banal platitudes and threats. Bernard was always going to get the better of the pre-fight verbals. It won't help Nard shit come April, though... MTF
Based on what? Calzaghe never beat anyone as good as either of those guys. You can say Kessler is better but it's not proven at this point.
Maybe on your first statement. Furthermore, Calzaghe's record isn't exactly sterling...in fact, Hops has a better resume. To quote Parrish Smith, So whatcha sayin?
Well, I thought Taylor went 0-4-1 against Hopkins, Wright and Pavlik, so I don't know how much he proved in those fights other than that he could fight them close and win narrow decisions. What Taylor proved against Spinks and Ouma is beyond me. So, Hopkins fighting closely against Taylor proved what? And Wright, who normally looked very strong at 154 and 160, clearly looked less than his best at 170. Calzaghe should be much more comfortable moving up to light heavyweight than Wright was (at a lower weight)...plus he has a style that should allow him to do better.
Kessler is definitely 'better' than a 36-year-old Wright fighting 2-3 divisions above his best weight. And Taylor? Just picture a Kessler-Taylor fight in your head at 168 lbs. after having seen Pav-Taylor I & II. Come on now. We can argue 'greatness' and resumes all we want and I understand what you're saying from that angle...but that's not the same as who beats who necessarily. Peace.
I will rate Kessler as soon as he fights someone else good and wins. Who's to say Winky wouldn't beat Kessler at 168? I'm also not sold on Kessler's power. I think JT would have a hell of a good chance in a fight with Kessler.
Taylor would be stopped, IMHO...though no doubt he'd be a good/live opponent. And to me it's relatively easy to understand this from simple analysis. I won't even comment on Winky, 'cause I know you're a fan and you'll trot out all manner of arguments. :: As for his resume...Kessler is clearly 2nd best at 168, period. He partially unified and he's beaten Andrade; Mudine (who beat Green and Soliman); Siaca (who beat Mundine), Beyer, Lucas, and so on...most importantly, he's beaten them by absolute landslide (whether decision or stoppage). I know you like Winky; but clearly Calzaghe deserves more credit for defeating Kessler in the fashion he did than Hopkins pulling up Wright to light heavyweight and beating him (old as Hops may be, which is a feat of course). I certainly picked Hopkins to beat Wright. Peace.
dsimon writes: I agree with your logic. The reason Hopkins will beat Joe is for far different reasons. Joe is not used to being in against a guy who will pressures like Hopkins. I really do not think Joe will respond well to being pressured. Nor will he like being hit to the body.
20 punches a round is pressure? This will be a hard fight for Joe because Bernard is the best defensive fighter he has been in the ring against and he is so good at taking away his opponents best weapons.
Exactly. Bernard is a tough, crafty master - but hardly a pressure fighter :: He's more of a counterpuncher, especially in his later career.
Even if hopkins loses he will still have a better resume. Calzaghe has nothing to gain from this fight except for the chance to fight one of his heros.
dsimon writes: He is a counterpuncher from the outside and a pressure fighter in close. When he gets close to you he is the aggressor. Bernard can make people fight at a range he wants the fight to progress at.
