where on earth do you get that one from? Its usually the sign of being an arrogant fwit with a fragile ego.

Most winners occasionally spit the dummy out in the immediate aftermath, often because of the annoyance with their own performance. In the cold light of day, they often change their stance. Just look at Ali's reaction when he lost to Frazier.

Pretty much how I saw it although I was suprised the American judges called it similar.

American judges love come forward fighters, the fact Hopkins sat back from round 4 onwards was borderline suicide.

Having said that it is a good job Hopkins did sit back because he looked like he had all the tools to take Joe out, Hopkins looked stronger, the right hand was dangerous and Joe had problems all night with that shot, the perfect Southpaw counter.

Fair points.

It has to be Jones, for the same reason why Lewis fought a haggard Tyson. Joe doesn't need to prove anything anymore, to the likes of Pavlik, Froch, Taylor et al. However, Roy Jones was [ithe[/i man for years in his division. We never got a Jones vs. Eubank or a Jones vs. Benn. Yet Jones is acknowledged as the greatest super-middleweight of that era. Calzaghe could exorcise a demon here—regardless of whether Jones is past it or not—completing his legacy.

After watching Jones last fight, he must still be in with a good chance of beating Calzaghe. He looked like he had the hunger back along with those glorious fast hands of his.

The only problem with that fight was that Felix Trinidad was punching way above his weight. His attacks weren't even stinging Jones and thus he could afford to pick his punches.

If Calzaghe is allowed to box, I think he would overwhelm Jones with his sheer volume of punches. I don't think Jones will like facing that rat-a-tat-tat style after the career he's had to date. No doubt that Jones will think he has a good chance going for the southpaw neutralising straight right-hand, which decked Calzaghe early on in the Hopkins fight.

Can't see Pavlik wanting the fight, the Jones option would suit both and raise stoopid amounts of cash.

Glad Calzaghe won .

Click the link below anyone interested ..

I've just watched the HBO version of the fight and i thought it was a bit if a let down.

Hopkins packed up after 5 rounds and offered little apart from whinging.

Froch v Inkin on the 10th of may,a final eliminator for Calzaghes super middle weight title,but i reckon it will be for the vacant title.I cant see Calzaghe fighting at that weight again,even if he does carry on after his next bout.Witter is on the same bill,remember him??

Froch also reckons that Hopkins won the fight and Calazaghe will retire instead of fighting him.

Froch also reckons he's any use, which marks him out as a fantasist in my book. If he can come up with one good reason as to why it would be in Calzaghe's interests to fight him, I would be very interested to hear from him.

This afternoon whilst bored, I watched the pre-fight Hopkins v Calzaghe programme on Satanta, how funny was Steve Bunce when Hopkins looked like he was going to slap him..................

A pure pampers moment!!

Im sure he would come up with plenty of reasons,wether they're any good is another thing

You could use the same argument for Roy Jones. He fought a weight-drained James Toney and avoided a lot of good fighters (including Michalczewski) on his way up to Heavyweight. At HW he took on the weakest champion (Ruiz) and when he came back down he was KTFO twice.

You're can't seriously suggest RJJ is NOT an all-time great.

Apart from Sven Ottke (against whom it's impossible to get a decision by judge) I suppose, Calzaghe has ducked nobody.

He's the undisputed SMW and Ring Magazine LHW champion. At SMW he's reigned for 10 years, which makes him the longest reigning titlist of any weight class in boxing. He is in the top 5 list of longest reigning champions full stop. He is almost universally regarded as being at #2 or #3 in the P4P list (behind Mayweather and - perhaps - Pacquiao).

Whilst his list of opponents doesn't include the stellar names found in ... say ... Hopkins' or RJJ's - he has fought a far greater number of good (Robin Reid, Brewer, Lacy), very good (Eubank and Kessler) and excellent (Hopkins) fighters.

After RJJ moved up from MW he consistently sought low risk opponents (probably because his chin is extremely suspect above MW).

Kessler is NOT a poor champion. He is an enormous SMW who has bludgeoned pretty much every rival he's faced. Certainly a big step up from the one-dimensional Lacy.

Calzaghe's legacy is recognised by boxing experts accross the globe. Bert Sugar said his performance against Lacy was one of the greatest he's ever seen (and he's seen more than most). Emmanuel Stewart regards Calzaghe as one of the finest champions in boxing. Even Roy Jones - who is a great student of the sport - recognises Calzaghe's worth.

Joe has nothing left to prove.

TBH, I think the time to quit is now. A fight against RJJ SHOULDN'T be too difficult (these days Roy tends to do a lot of fighting against the ropes, which is where Calzaghe is at his strongest) but you never know. Roy is a harder puncher and better finisher than the over-cautious Hopkins. He's also retained a good bit of speed. And he seems to be on a bit of a roll.

Regarding the Hopkins fight, I thought it was close to a draw. But Joe was the aggressor and Vegas judges are known to favour such.

While most of the chat has been about Calzaghe (and rightly so), can I just say how good it was to see Ryan Rhodes regain a British title at the weekend.

He may not be as flash as he used to be and the reflexes may not be quite there, but he's still got good hand speed, a decent punch and now some maturity and experience to go with it.

Not sure how much he may be able to progress up the ladder, but it's still good to see him back IMO.

Was watching it in the pub with very little sound.

Was the kid alright at the end? I don’t recall seeing him get up?

Rhodes threw some beautiful punches and his movement (which I thought had been poor in his previous couple of bouts) was spot on.

Yeah, took a few minutes to get him back on his feet. Was out like a light, Mickey Vann rolled him onto his side and took the mouthgard out before the paramedics got into the ring.

Yeah, head movement was good and the impressive thing for me was that when the chance came he didn't wade in like a whirling dervish throwing shots from everywhere. Much more methodical and clinical, which are things you haven't been able to say about Rhodes probably ever.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/7366493.stm

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/7366493.stm

Rhodes was a precocious talent, but he was badly exposed when he stepped up in class.

He deserves congratulations for winning the British title, but it's of minimal worth in an international context and he has no chance of competing at international level in the future.

Anyone seen the interview with Naseem Hamed on Sky Sports News?

What an absolute prick he [istill[/i is.

Naseem Hamed was never going to be popular in Britain - he was arrogant and relatively successful.

He needed to be more like Greg Rusedski, the self-effacing but useless type is more likely to be popular with the British sporting public.

Naz beat not far from a dozen past and future champions. He'd have been a lot closer to Barrera if he'd been a) in his prime (about the time of the fight against Robinson) and b) hadn't stopped training in the three weeks leading up to the fight,

You forgot c) not been such an arrogant prick, although that kind of encompasses b) I suppose.