Hopkins-Calzaghe scoring

**shakermaker1982** · 20/04/2008, 9:59 AM

How did you guys score the fight? Anyone watch it?

No way Calzaghe won that fight. I could understand a draw but winning by such a wide margin on one card?

**Big Ears** · 20/04/2008, 11:09 AM

115-112 Calzaghe

**Superhoops** · 20/04/2008, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by shakermaker1982

How did you guys score the fight? Anyone watch it?

No way Calzaghe won that fight. I could understand a draw but winning by such a wide margin on one card?

American judges will always lean towards fighters who move forward. The 116-111 card in Calzaghe's favour was a round or two unkind to Hopkins but similarly the judge who gave it 114-113 to Hopkins was a round or two unkind to Calzaghe.

Hopkins definitely tired in the second half, you'd expect that from a man of 43, but he did not help his cause with his below the belt antics, particularly after his trainer Freddie Roach before the fight appeared to encourage a bit of 'rule bending'.

The disappointing aspect was the refereeing of Joe Cortez who should have definitely docked Hopkins a point for use of the head and who allowed Hopkins to hang on and tie up Calzaghe throughout the fight when a few weeks ago the same Joe Cortez warned Ricky Hatton several times for exactly the same thing.

You would have to say that Calzaghe must have done enough to get get up off the floor and then get the nod from 2 of the 3 American judges in America.

**osarusan** · 20/04/2008, 1:27 PM

Originally Posted by Superhoops

American judges will always lean towards fighters who move forward.

That doesn't mean it's the correct decision though. Look at Marvin Hagler versus Ray Leonard for an example of how lots of expenditure of energy can win you fights, even if you are out-punched and out-thought.

I'm not saying the Calzaghe decision was wrong, as I haven't seen it, but the fighter who comes forward shouldn't get some kind of headstart from the judges.

**hoops1** · 20/04/2008, 2:25 PM

The decision was right Calzaghe won clearly. Apart from the 1st and 9th Hopkins didnt do enough. Hopkins was shot in the last 3 rounds and was in survival mode

**shakermaker1982** · 20/04/2008, 3:06 PM

It's split most boxing fans and ringside observers. I thought Hopkins deserved at least a draw. Most of Calzaghe's slaps missed and the effective punches came from Hopkins. Now Calzaghe wants to fight Roy Jones.........a 39 year old who got knocked out by Glencoffe Johnson a while back.

**Ceirtlis** · 20/04/2008, 3:48 PM

I thought it was a draw or a one point win for Calzaghe. The 116-111 verdict was a bit of a joke i thought.

**rambler14** · 20/04/2008, 5:36 PM

I scored it 115-112 Calzaghe. My Dad scored it 114-110 Calzaghe.

Calzaghe deservedly won IMO. Hopkins was lucky not be disqualified as he kept charging into Calzaghe with his head.
Calzaghe won all the middle rounds. Hopkins won the first two but lost the next 6. Calzaghe won it purely on jabs alone and proved you can win without the big punchs.

I was shocked to see one judge gave the fight 116-111 Hopkins.

The other 2 scores seemed spot on.

**shakermaker1982** · 20/04/2008, 7:33 PM

114-113 Hopkins was the first score that was read out wasn't it?

**rambler14** · 20/04/2008, 8:13 PM

Originally Posted by shakermaker1982

114-113 Hopkins was the first score that was read out wasn't it?

Could have been. I was half asleep when it was read out.

**Dodge** · 20/04/2008, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by rambler14

I scored it 115-112 Calzaghe. My Dad scored it 114-110 Calzaghe.

How did he manaage 114-110? Very strange

I had it 114-113 and that was with a 10-8 opening round for Hopkins.

Please not all scoring was done under influence of alcohol

**Superhoops** · 20/04/2008, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

How did he manaage 114-110? Very strange

I had it 114-113 and that was with a 10-8 opening round for Hopkins.

Please not all scoring was done under influence of alcohol

For Hopkins to get 110 knowing he won the first 10-8, he could have only won or shared one more round and lost the other 10. Not even the most biased Calzaghe fan could have seen the fight the way although one of the judges only gave him one more round than that with a score of 111.

**Big Ears** · 20/04/2008, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by shakermaker1982

114-113 Hopkins was the first score that was read out wasn't it?

Yes it was and normally whoever wins on the first card will get the 3rd aswell(in a split decision) , however I really thought a draw was coming as we had no 'we have a Unanamous/split/mixed decision being read out and when the first two cards had it one a piece it looked ominous .

**joeSoap** · 21/04/2008, 8:45 AM

Bernard Hopkins was a legend. Up until that fight Saturday night. In one fight he managed to undo his reputation of being one of the greatest middleweights of all time. His constant headbutting, holding and pretending he was castrated when slightly tapped below the belt was despicable behaviour and certainly not that of a boxing legend. He is clearly finished now, and if he wants to continue in the ring, may I suggest he goes and talks to Vince McMahon and works for the WWE.

**joeSoap** · 21/04/2008, 8:49 AM

Originally Posted by Big Ears

Yes it was and normally whoever wins on the first card will get the 3rd aswell(in a split decision) , however I really thought a draw was coming as we had no 'we have a Unanamous/split/mixed decision being read out and when the first two cards had it one a piece it looked ominous .

It was initially announced as split decision by Buffer.

Incidentally, did anyone see /hear Sylvester Stallone make a right tool of himself, screaming profanities at Calzaghe for the low blow in the 9th? What a knob!!

**Dodge** · 21/04/2008, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by joeSoap

Bernard Hopkins was a legend. Up until that fight Saturday night. In one fight he managed to undo his reputation of being one of the greatest middleweights of all time

Ridiculous comment. name one ghreat fighter who didn't have a poor fight? And even then how can his reputation as one of the best middleweights of all time be tarnished by one fight at light heavy?

**shakermaker1982** · 21/04/2008, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by joeSoap

Bernard Hopkins was a legend. Up until that fight Saturday night. In one fight he managed to undo his reputation of being one of the greatest middleweights of all time. His constant headbutting, holding and pretending he was castrated when slightly tapped below the belt was despicable behaviour and certainly not that of a boxing legend. He is clearly finished now, and if he wants to continue in the ring, may I suggest he goes and talks to Vince McMahon and works for the WWE.

That is how Hopkin's fights - he didn't change his fighting style!!!! The Joppy fight, Keith Holmes, Eastman, both Robert Allen fights and the Winky Wright fight were all won that way. I thought he put a boxing clinic on Calzaghe in those first 6 rounds.

Calzaghe's rabbit punches and slaps annoyed me more to be honest.

**joeSoap** · 21/04/2008, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Ridiculous comment. name one ghreat fighter who didn't have a poor fight? And even then how can his reputation as one of the best middleweights of all time be tarnished by one fight at light heavy?

It was his dirty antics (illegal use of the head) and blatant attempts to cheat by pretending he was more hurt than he was when barely tapped below the belt that tarnished his reputation for me, not anything to do with his boxing ability. I felt he made a laugh of the sport by such behaviour, which to me is akin to diving in football, and persistent fouling. The referee didn't help matters either, and certainly contradicted his own refereeing style compared to the way he refereed Mayweather-Hatton, where he constantly scolded Hatton for dropping his head and holding, yet here he let Hopkins do what he wanted. Sorry you found my comment ridiculous Dodge, thats just how I saw it.

**Dodge** · 21/04/2008, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by joeSoap

The referee didn't help matters either, and certainly contradicted his own refereeing style compared to the way he refereed Mayweather-Hatton, where he constantly scolded Hatton for dropping his head and holding, yet here he let Hopkins do what he wanted

You mean the ref changed his style for the Mayweather-Hatton fight. he was back to normal on Saturday

**joeSoap** · 21/04/2008, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by shakermaker1982

I thought he put a boxing clinic on Calzaghe in those first 6 rounds.

Calzaghe's rabbit punches and slaps annoyed me more to be honest.

We obviously see the game differently. I would have given him the first three rounds, the ninth and tenth and thats it. He never hurt Calzaghe, even with the knockdown. Calzaghe was never in any danger in the fight, and by being the aggressor, won a pretty poor contest in my opinion.