ESPN Boxing

LOS ANGELES -- Chuck Giampa shouldn't expect any retirement gifts from Bernard Hopkins, who is still miffed he lost a split decision to Joe Calzaghe on April 19 in Las Vegas.

Giampa was one of two judges who scored the fight for the Welshman, awarding Calzaghe nine of the 12 rounds for a total score of 116-111. Judge Ted Gimza saw Calzaghe a 115-112 winner, while judge Adalaide Byrd scored it for Hopkins, 114-113.

It would be the last of 120 world title fights in Giampa's 24-year career as a judge. He resigned last week, saying he plans to expand his insurance business to help boxers prepare for their retirement and also act as a consultant to fighters and trainers who are looking for a judge's perspective on the sport.

"I'm certainly not out of boxing," Giampa said from Las Vegas. "I wanted to take my boxing and insurance experience to a different level in boxing, and I felt it was a good time to do it."

Hopkins has his own perspective on Giampa's retirement. The boxer called for a referendum of judging in the sport and said judges should be re-evaluated periodically to ensure their refereeing remains sharp.

"He retired two weeks too late," said Hopkins, who is in Los Angeles to attend Oscar De La Hoya's fight with Steve Forbes on Saturday night at the Home Depot Center in Carson, Calif. "I don't think my fight with Calzaghe was a landslide, but the nine rounds he gave to Joe Calzaghe was totally ridiculous."

After scoring more than 2,000 fights, including Evander Holyfield-Mike Tyson II "Bite Fight" and the Holyfield-Riddick Bowe "Fan Man" fight, Giampa has learned to have thick skin. But as a fan of boxing and a fan of fighters, the 65-year-old understands Hopkins' beef.

"I've heard some criticism that I was too wide and I can accept that," Giampa said. "When I analyze the scorecards, we [judges] only agreed on six rounds and the six rounds we didn't agree, I was in sync with one other judge. If I was the only one for Calzaghe in all those rounds and they had it the other way, I would question what I saw.

"I can fully understand [Hopkins] not being pleased with my decision. But I'll still stand by that based on what I saw."

Since learning of Giampa's retirement, Hopkins has developed a conspiracy theory, questioning the timing of his departure.

"Is he getting pressured? Is there something out there that we don't know about right now, like when a politician resigns before [trouble] hits the fan? Or maybe he realized he was just too damn old to do the judging," Hopkins said.

Quite the contrary.

Giampa resigned so he could have more of an impact on the sport. An insurance broker for nearly 40 years, he wants to help fighters better prepare themselves financially for their post-fight careers.

"I've been out here since the '80s and I've seen too many guys that don't wind up with much or have any income once they finish fighting," Giampa said. "My love of the sport goes back many, many years. I want to give back to the fighters and make them aware they could have a life after boxing if they do some managing."

Giampa also wants to serve as a consultant to fighters and managers, showing them what judges look for during a fight and how to maximize their performance.

"I see too many fighters that start too late or take a rest in the later part of the fight when maybe one extra round can make a difference," Giampa said. "You can hold, but you have to score, too."

The Hopkins-Calzaghe decision was the latest to go against a Golden Boy fighter. Juan Manuel Marquez lost a split decision to Manny Pacquiao in March and De La Hoya dropped a split decision to Floyd Mayweather Jr. last May. It has some in the Golden Boy ranks questioning the judging in Nevada.

"We've had seven fights in Las Vegas, and when they've been close we've never got the decision," De La Hoya said. "Why is that?"

Hopkins' answer is to have judges periodically re-evaluated to check their competence. "People should realize that boxing officials have to be re-evaluated just like an aging driver," Hopkins said. "There has to be some test or evaluation to see if the people who judged fights when they were younger have lost something as they got older.

"If a fighter or trainer can lose what [they] were good at at one time in [their] career, anybody can become not as good as [they] used to be," Hopkins continued. That goes for fighters, that goes for judges and it goes for referees."

Giampa said he always has prepared himself physically and mentally before every fight he has scored. His preparation involves diet and exercise as well as research on the boxers.

"I believe the fighters are in 100 percent shape and hopefully their training has peaked for the fight," Giampa said. "They deserve that from us. If we're not 100 percent, then I'm not doing my job. I've taken pride over the years in developing my own style and preparation."

In addition, judges in Nevada must be certified by the Association of Boxing Commissions every two years, Giampa said. This includes attending clinics and taking written tests. Also, judges periodically review fights they've scored with officials of the Nevada State Athletic Commission.

"There are checks and balances, but then again [judging] is subjective," Giampa said.

That may not satisfy Hopkins, who insists he should have won the fight against Calzaghe.

"I believe I did enough to win. There's nothing else I could have done in that fight, other than knock him out," Hopkins said. "I believe I made Joe look ordinary, like I said I would. I said I'd make him look amateurish, which I did. My punches hurt him every time I threw a punch. I cut him. It was an old fox veteran fight."

George Willis is the boxing columnist for The New York Post.