Hopkins is a great, and Calzaghe isn't

First topic message reminder :

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.

Imperial Ghosty wrote: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.

Its a different context altogether. A discussion I would not get into.

The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

I dont think Hopkins is genuinely racist. People use throwaway remarks all the time. I dont think Hopkins holds racist beliefs regardless of the "white boy" comment.

Ive read and seen stuff thats hes done that indicates he isnt a racist.

Hopkins said what he said to promote the fight. Hopkins said so himself. It was "premeditated". Minter was a working class scumbag with no education. Was Minter racist? Absolutely. If Hopkins was racist, why would he allow Roach to train him? Do you really think Minter would want a Richardson - a black Muslim - to train him? Gimme a break!

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

The context is very different. But actions speak louder than words especially given that Hop says and does provocative things prior to a fight. I suppose you will assume he hates Puerto Rico also.

I've called neither a racist but what they said was racist and personally do find it unacceptable to burn somebodys flag but each to their own, if you wish to make excuses for casually making racist comments go ahead. No the context is not different apart from one thing.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I've called neither a racist but what they said was racist and personally do find it unacceptable to burn somebodys flag but each to their own, if you wish to make excuses for casually making racist comments go ahead. No the context is not different apart from one thing.

There is a huge difference in making a comment which is racist and being a racist. Also there is a cultural difference within the racial politics of USA and here.

Neither Minter or Hopkins are racist but they both certainly made racist comments, I know your reasoning behind all this but I wont go into all that.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Neither Minter or Hopkins are racist but they both certainly made racist comments, I know your reasoning behind all this but I wont go into all that.

Amongst your many talents, should I now include mind reading.

Anyway, I defer to manos's post.

You don't read whats written at all do you

Imperial Ghosty wrote:You don't read whats written at all do you

I read very well. But you said you knew my reasoning. How so, unless you can read my mind.

I worked you out a long time ago

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I worked you out a long time ago

well done. Congratulations and give yourself a donut.

I'll just sit here in my self righteous splender

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I'll just sit here in my self righteous splender

Clever boy.

hitmansam wrote:Calzaghe was school by Hopkins.

Hardly!!!

Hopkins is a great and clearly has a far better cv than JC but Hopkins couldn't adapt well enough to JC.

JC landed more punches on BHop than any other fighter, he raised the pace to a level which BHop struggled at and deserved a close win. Whilst I fully agree that his punches weren't hurtful and he didn't bust up BHop, he used fast punches and made enough openings to land scoring shots.

Hopkins clearly has the tools to beat JC but he wasn't aggressive enough. He was so worrired about JCs pace and workrate that he tried to steal rounds instead of him winning the fight.

He brought that loss upon himself.

I like Calzaghe and he did just pip Hopkins but i do have more respect for Froch who is fighting the very best in the division which Calzaghe did not. Froch has not had the exposure Calzaghe did but he is doing it the tough way.

Oh for sure, what Froch is doing right now should be applauded by the wider sporting public in this country.

Have to respect him!

hitmansam wrote:Hopkins said what he said to promote the fight. Hopkins said so himself. It was "premeditated". Minter was a working class scumbag with no education. Was Minter racist? Absolutely. If Hopkins was racist, why would he allow Roach to train him? Do you really think Minter would want a Richardson - a black Muslim - to train him? Gimme a break!

Not sure what your on about i was aboxing on a regimental show once and guest honour was Alan Minter. I was drinking with him for good couple hours i am mixed race cannot see why such a racist bloke would drink with a mixed race soldier......you do not know bloke you have never spent any time with him so becareful when you assume stuff for your own ends.

For what its worth, I scored that fight to JC. Regardless of who won, that Hopkins haas achieved what he has elevates JC imo.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

Hopkins never said that though

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

Hopkins never said that though

Yes he did.

TumblingDice wrote:

hitmansam wrote:Calzaghe was school by Hopkins.

Hardly!!!

Hopkins is a great and clearly has a far better cv than JC but Hopkins couldn't adapt well enough to JC.

JC landed more punches on BHop than any other fighter, he raised the pace to a level which BHop struggled at and deserved a close win. Whilst I fully agree that his punches weren't hurtful and he didn't bust up BHop, he used fast punches and made enough openings to land scoring shots.

Hopkins clearly has the tools to beat JC but he wasn't aggressive enough. He was so worrired about JCs pace and workrate that he tried to steal rounds instead of him winning the fight.

He brought that loss upon himself.

The way to beat Hopkins is by setting a high pace and beating him to the punch, Calzaghe done this. I would favour Calzaghe to beat Hopkins 7 times out of 10.

D4thincarnation wrote:

TumblingDice wrote:

hitmansam wrote:Calzaghe was school by Hopkins.

Hardly!!!

Hopkins is a great and clearly has a far better cv than JC but Hopkins couldn't adapt well enough to JC.

JC landed more punches on BHop than any other fighter, he raised the pace to a level which BHop struggled at and deserved a close win. Whilst I fully agree that his punches weren't hurtful and he didn't bust up BHop, he used fast punches and made enough openings to land scoring shots.

Hopkins clearly has the tools to beat JC but he wasn't aggressive enough. He was so worrired about JCs pace and workrate that he tried to steal rounds instead of him winning the fight.

He brought that loss upon himself.

The way to beat Hopkins is by setting a high pace and beating him to the punch, Calzaghe done this. I would favour Calzaghe to beat Hopkins 7 times out of 10.

Same here. You have to fight your fight and dont allow Hop to spoil as he usually does. Quick punches and get out.

D4, stick to Pacroid.

hitmansam wrote:D4, stick to Pacroid.

Lets not go down there please.

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

Hopkins never said that though

Wrong.

Quote: "I will never let a white boy beat me". Not the exact same words, but the meaning is the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB0gD6O_Ak&feature=youtube_gdata_player

hitmansam wrote:D4, stick to Pacroid.

Ok Pacquiao is better than Hopkins and Calzaghe.

Calzaghe is a great fighter, just because Hopkins has greater longevity, it doesn't make Calzaghe not a great fighter.

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

Hopkins never said that though

Wrong.

Quote: "I will never let a white boy beat me". Not the exact same words, but the meaning is the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB0gD6O_Ak&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I said he never said that.

And you have just proved I'm right.

D4thincarnation wrote:

hitmansam wrote:D4, stick to Pacroid.

Ok Pacquiao is better than Hopkins and Calzaghe.

Calzaghe is a great fighter, just because Hopkins has greater longevity, it doesn't make Calzaghe not a great fighter.

Calzaghe has a better record at SMW and LHW that Rocky did at HW. FACT

D4thincarnation wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The context is the same, saying you will not lose a black man is exactly the same as saying you will not lose to a white man

Hopkins never said that though

Wrong.

Quote: "I will never let a white boy beat me". Not the exact same words, but the meaning is the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB0gD6O_Ak&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I said he never said that.

And you have just proved I'm right.

Semantics.

azania wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

hitmansam wrote:D4, stick to Pacroid.

Ok Pacquiao is better than Hopkins and Calzaghe.

Calzaghe is a great fighter, just because Hopkins has greater longevity, it doesn't make Calzaghe not a great fighter.

Calzaghe has a better record at SMW and LHW that Rocky did at HW. FACT

Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

It doesn't for me sadly. Pascal will not get into the HoF even if he is the last boxer alive. Many of Pac's victims will. I dont think that Hop has beaten a HoFer outside of blown up wleterweights and a faded Jones.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

Many of Pacquiaos opponents had come from lower divisions too

Not that many hall of famers around at the moment sadly

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

Almost as funny as rating Pacquiao's weight hopping above that of Armstrong don't you think or is any view that doesn't proclaim him as the greatest laughable?

Mosley, Morales, Barrera, Marquez, Cotto and DLH will all almost certainly make the hall.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Many of Pacquiaos opponents had come from lower divisions too

Not that many hall of famers around at the moment sadly

MAB, Morales, JMM, Hatton, Cotto, SSM (faded). That's a heck of a resume. They were all also at their correct weight with the exception of Cotto who was drained by 2lbs. Still a much better resume that Hop. No need to argue the point just because you want to get one over D4. You would be wrong and it you look at it objectively, you will agree.

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

It doesn't for me sadly. Pascal will not get into the HoF even if he is the last boxer alive. Many of Pac's victims will. I dont think that Hop has beaten a HoFer outside of blown up wleterweights and a faded Jones.

Winky will, Tarver possibly.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

Almost as funny as rating Pacquiao's weight hopping above that of Armstrong don't you think or is any view that doesn't proclaim him as the greatest laughable?

Ghosty, you are one of the first to complain vocally about an alleged obsession with Pac. Now you want to divert a thread about Hopkins to.....Pac. It has absolutely nothing to do with Armstrong, Tunney, Charles, Larry, Mo The Bartender or whoever.

Stay on topic please.

D4thincarnation wrote:

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

It doesn't for me sadly. Pascal will not get into the HoF even if he is the last boxer alive. Many of Pac's victims will. I dont think that Hop has beaten a HoFer outside of blown up wleterweights and a faded Jones.

Winky will, Tarver possibly.

Tarver is doubtful. But interestingly, Winky was at LHW whilst his best weight was JMW.

azania wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sorry but after last nights victory Hopkins ranks above Pacquiao for me, proved without a shadow of a doubt with his longevity and dominance to be the premier boxer of his generation.

It doesn't for me sadly. Pascal will not get into the HoF even if he is the last boxer alive. Many of Pac's victims will. I dont think that Hop has beaten a HoFer outside of blown up wleterweights and a faded Jones.

Winky will, Tarver possibly.

Tarver is doubtful. But interestingly, Winky was at LHW whilst his best weight was JMW.

170lbs catchweight.

Hopkins is the Catchweight King.

I actually have Hopkins at number 21 on my all time list now but if we discounting the Trinidad win because he was moving up then so too did Barrera, Morales, Marquez, Cotto and Mosley at some stage in their career. I have and always will favour longevity at a weight over a hit and run of one or two fights.

Hopkins beat the best Middleweights around at the time, Holmes, Joppy, Eastman, Brown, Trinidad, Johnson and Jackson were no fools not to mention wins over Tarver, Wright, Pavlik and Pascal while on the wrong side of 40. With the exception of Jones jr and Calzaghe there's no one in those weight classes who are going to get into the hall of fame.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I actually have Hopkins at number 21 on my all time list now but if we discounting the Trinidad win because he was moving up then so too did Barrera, Morales, Marquez, Cotto and Mosley at some stage in their career. I have and always will favour longevity at a weight over a hit and run of one or two fights.

Hopkins beat the best Middleweights around at the time, Holmes, Joppy, Eastman, Brown, Trinidad, Johnson and Jackson were no fools not to mention wins over Tarver, Wright, Pavlik and Pascal while on the wrong side of 40. With the exception of Jones jr and Calzaghe there's no one in those weight classes who are going to get into the hall of fame.

Are you aware that Hop only acknowledges one loss and that was to RJJ (someone you rate below Hop).

I'm aware of that but Jones doesn't come close for a whole career for me

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I'm aware of that but Jones doesn't come close for a whole career for me

I think you will find that most objective observers will rank RJJ ahead of Hop.

Then again its good to go against the grain sometimes, especially if you have good reasoning.

Think you'll find that the general consensus now is that Hopkins ranks ahead of Jones but good try

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Think you'll find that the general consensus now is that Hopkins ranks ahead of Jones but good try

Not above Pacquiao but that doesn't stop you from going against the general consensus

Nor does it stop you going against the general consensus with regards to Mayweathers placing or does that come under a different rule set in your mind?