Joe Calzaghe-Bernard Hopkins: The British View

And so Joe Calzaghe secured a split decision in Las Vegas against the justifiably defined "legend" that is Bernard Hopkins.  Despite being knocked down in a flash after 70 seconds of the fight, he recovered and went on to impress the judges sufficiently to gain a hugely significant victory and maintain his undefeated record.  But did he really do enough to win and will he return to America to face Roy Jones?

 Having managed to keep myself awake until 3am to watch the fight, I sat down on the sofa with more than a little fear for the Italian Dragon's undefeated record.  Having witnessed Hatton succumb in a similar venue with virtually the same band of followers, I had my doubts in the wily Welshman's ability to box with his head and not his heart.

 And so it proved, Calzaghe walking into a fierce right hand that sent him sprawling in the first round, stirring memories of Hatton's bout with Mayweather. 

However, once he had recovered from the very early setback, he composed himself and set about taking apart Hopkins' game with far greater aggression than the 43 year old home fighter was prepared to show.

Make no mistake, Hopkins fought an extremely intelligent fight, slowing the pace down and frustrating Calzaghe with defensive tactics that suited his ageing frame.  But the judges seemed to ultimately be swayed by Calzaghe's greater desire to win and the 'phantom punch' that Hopkins claimed as a low blow and spent 5 minutes recovering from.

As a Brit, I was rooting for Calzaghe all the way but was truly surprised by the carding of the judges.  After such a close fight, I believed the judges would naturally side with the home fighter and return a unanimous Hopkins verdict.  Indeed, my 'unofficial card' only marked it 114-113 to Calzaghe and I had my supporters' hat on.  

Chuck Giampa's carding of 116-111, giving Hopkins only three rounds, was contentious at best, unsurprisingly providing a precursor to B-Hop's rejection of the judge's verdict following the fight.

If I was a judge, I would have awarded it to 'Our Joe'.  But Hopkins most definitely has a case and it would not surprise me in the least for him to demand a re-match to decide this match-up once and for all. 

What are your views? Did Hopkins deserve to win? Or did Calzaghe's extra aggression justify the victory? Please comment below with your views and opinions.