Thread: Can froch now legitimately claim to be remembered as better than Calzaghe

Originally Posted by ross

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Just to play devil's advocate:

Taylor - Pavlik already stopped him. 160 was his best weight class.
Abraham - Dirrell already beat him. 160 was his best weight class.
Pascal - Great Win. 175 is his best weight class though.
Bute - Froch's best win.
Kessler - Good win. Splits series with Kessler. 31 year old Kessler beat Froch in a close fight. 34 year old Kessler lost to Froch in close fight. Age play a role?
Dirrell - Close fight. Counts as a win though.

I think Froch deserves credit for the Taylor win, because Taylor looked sharp and Froch fought better version of Taylor than Abraham and ETC fought. Also remember Taylor fought Pavlik in there rematch at near enough 168, and Taylor performed better in the rematch than he did at Middleweight losing a narrow decision. Also remember how high everyone ranked Pavlik at that time.

As for the Kessler fight Froch is older than Kessler remember, also i think why Froch lost the 1st fight was because he was too passive. In the rematch he started off very quickly and was alot more aggressive, which is why i think he won rather than it to do with Kessler's age.

Kessler wan a world title 4 years before Froch fought for one. Kessler is tired at the weight. He first became a world champ at super middle 9 years ago. Kessler was a unified champ before his first loss to Calzaghe. It has taken Froch 2 losses to become a unified champ.

Kessler hasn't really had a hard career though, he's a fresh 34 year old Froch has been in more wars than Kessler.

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

Wow. Just wow. Can I ask hold old you are?

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

Wow. Just wow. Can I ask hold old you are?

Does it matter how old i am ? i've seen pretty much every important Joe Calzaghe fight. Aswell as every important Carl Froch fight, so i think i can voice an opinion on both fighters.

Im not really sure why your so gob smacked by my comment ? what in my comment has shocked you ? i think pretty much mostly everyone on this thread agrees that Froch has beaten more household names at SMW, but in a head to head sense Calzaghe would beat Froch.

Im not really sure what else i can say.

The long and short of it for me is that Froch has had a better peak career and that a fight between the two would be very competative. Both fighters have attributes that the other has been challenged by in the past.

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

Wow. Just wow. Can I ask hold old you are?

Does it matter how old i am ? i've seen pretty much every important Joe Calzaghe fight. Aswell as every important Carl Froch fight, so i think i can voice an opinion on both fighters.

Im not really sure why your so gob smacked by my comment ? what in my comment has shocked you ? i think pretty much mostly everyone on this thread agrees that Froch has beaten more household names at SMW, but in a head to head sense Calzaghe would beat Froch.

Im not really sure what else i can say.

Yeah I'm really not sure what about ICB's opinion shocks you so much. Most people would agree Froch has the better resume but Calzaghe is the better fighter.

It isn't really Joe's fault that these names weren't about. Calzaghe beat everyone he could possibly beat at Super Middle.

Originally Posted by oakleyno1

In two respects:
Peak vs Peak & Secondly Career wise

Career wise I think there is no competition - froch has now beaten what was Joe's best ever win - on the same terms (i.e. at home) and by similar margins

No doubt in my mind froch would beat Hopkins and every other person on joe's resume

However Peak vs Peak will still be debated - and perhaps this is because Froch has just hit his peak a couple of years ago

I would actually say Froch vs JC at peak would now be a pick em fight - and if froch can beat ward I would give it to carl all the way -

compared to watching the taylor fight all those years ago he has come on so much if you watch -
full respect to carl!

I wouldn't say better, Joe in his prime would comfortably beat Carl in his Prime! However when you look at their resumes and career paths, Cobra has superiority in the way he has gone about his business!

I think Froch's career is every bit as good as Calzaghe's. Froch has proven that he will fight anyone, anywhere and he has consistently turned up fit, prepared and motivated. he has shown courage and grit second to none - he is a real brute of a fighter.

Calzaghe, of course, has that undefeated record and it's always really hard to win an argument saying that anybody would certainly have won against an undefeated fighter.

HOWEVER - rather than try and make a logical argument based on who they fought, when, who fought the best people and all that (which is really quite subjective) .... I think Carl trades on brute force, he is so so strong but his technique is pretty ungainly. Ive noticed that he likes to box at the middle distance, and ward beat him by fighting either at long range or right close up. carl doesn't infight at all, if you notice.

I rate carl very highly indeed, but Calzaghe (in my opinion only) was just that little bit more multidimensional. If they has fought each other at their peaks we would all know exactly what to expect from Froch (and the only question would be whether Calzaghe could cope with it, did he have enough power to get carl's respect, could he outbox him, would he be too fast, would he break his hands on Froch's iron chin?) ....... but Joe was a master at creating and setting the tempo and style of his fights (he even changed it half way through against Kessler). I just think that - technically - Joe would bring too much variety and outpoint Froch by quite a wide margin.

I also don't mean to demean Froch in any way, because he is a magnificent fighter - his wars with Kessler (and the build up) are everything that is good about boxing.

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

My God that list is sickening!

I agree with all of this but still firmly believe that Calzaghe beats Froch 4 times outta 5. Just too many holes in Froch's arsenal and too slow of hand and foot and not sharp enough to prevent Calzaghe from successfully outworking/ outsmarting him.

Calzaghe could beat anyone Froch already has. With the exception of maybe Dirrell.

Its pretty obvious that froch has had a much harder road than JC.

But then again how much of this is frank warrens fault?

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

Wow. Just wow. Can I ask hold old you are?

Does it matter how old i am ? i've seen pretty much every important Joe Calzaghe fight. Aswell as every important Carl Froch fight, so i think i can voice an opinion on both fighters.

Im not really sure why your so gob smacked by my comment ? what in my comment has shocked you ? i think pretty much mostly everyone on this thread agrees that Froch has beaten more household names at SMW, but in a head to head sense Calzaghe would beat Froch.

Im not really sure what else i can say.

Just strange that you would rate a shot Taylor, a shot Johnson, an average Abraham and an average Bute above Hopkins, RJJ, Lacy. I think the above at the time Joe fought them beats anyone Carl fought at the time he fought them. I know Jones was a bit shot when he fought Joe but I still think that Roy beats them. Sure Hopkins today would still beat them all

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ICB

He's beaten better names at Super Middleweight than Calzaghe ever did.

Jermain Taylor
Andre Dirrell
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Mikkel Kessler
Glen Johnson

Apart from Mikkel Kessler obviously who on Calzaghe's list at Super Middleweight really compares with them names ?

Chris Eubank maybe but Eubank was weight drained and not in his prime, still a good win for Calzaghe. But other names like Woodhall, Reid, Lacy, don't really compare IMO.

And Reid and Woodhall were both coming off bad losses, Reid lost his title to a 42 year old Thulani Malinga in one of the worst world title fights i've ever seen.

And Woodhall had just lost to Markus Beyer, being decked 3 times by a fighter not known to be a hard hitter.

Calzaghe maybe the better skilled fighter, but Froch is more willing to fight the top boys and has beaten more dangerous fighters at Super Middleweight IMO.

Wow. Just wow. Can I ask hold old you are?

Does it matter how old i am ? i've seen pretty much every important Joe Calzaghe fight. Aswell as every important Carl Froch fight, so i think i can voice an opinion on both fighters.

Im not really sure why your so gob smacked by my comment ? what in my comment has shocked you ? i think pretty much mostly everyone on this thread agrees that Froch has beaten more household names at SMW, but in a head to head sense Calzaghe would beat Froch.

Im not really sure what else i can say.

Just strange that you would rate a shot Taylor, a shot Johnson, an average Abraham and an average Bute above Hopkins, RJJ, Lacy. I think the above at the time Joe fought them beats anyone Carl fought at the time he fought them. I know Jones was a bit shot when he fought Joe but I still think that Roy beats them. Sure Hopkins today would still beat them all

RJJ was completely shot, i find it strange your trying to give JC any credit for RJJ win. Calzaghe himself said in his own words a few years before he fought RJJ, "Beating RJJ would mean nothing now" so why a few years later should it mean something ? look at RJJ's record after the Calzaghe fight, this isn't the 90's RJJ were talking about here.

Jeff Lacy overhyped and was only ever mediocre, he struggled against Peter Manfredo for crying out loud. Amongst all his other one sided losses, including losing to in your own words "A shot Jermain Taylor" by 12 rounds to 0.

I don't think Jermain Taylor was shot either, maybe not at his 100 percent best but not shot. He lost a razor thin decision to Pavlik and destroyed Jeff Lacy who you seem to rate.

The only real win i'd give him credit for is the B-Hop one, although i felt B-Hop edged it by 1 round. But that's debatable but i'd agree on the B-HOP win but nothing else.