The best

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RohanKnight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RohanKnight

Froch has eclipsed Calzaghe now. If he had picked his fights he'd be unbeaten too.


I really do want the Big Man from Nottingham to take Ward, but its asking a lot at 34.

A lot of people think Carl would have got knocked out by JC but I cant see that happening, and most likely the Calzo would get a points victory by going all slappy as is his habit.

---

Well he has lost only once and that was to somebody Calzaghe also fought and beat, so your logic is pretty stupid.

---

yeah i dont understand why its stupid. Have you misread me? You must think I am talkin about who wouldn win in a fight - thats where your counterargument works, but it dont work with my point - I I am talking about their resume. Joe Fraiser has a better resume with bigger wins than Larry Holmes, but Holmes would win in a fight between them.

---

No, I am simply talking about the part of your post I highlighted:

"If he had picked his fights he'd be unbeaten too."

Calzaghe fought and beat the guy that Froch lost to, so Cazlaghe clearly didn't 'pick' a fight that was easier than fights that Froch 'Picked' In fact Froch lost to an already beaten fighter. Calzgahe beat an unbeaten one.

I agree that if Froch had 'picked' differently (and avoided the fighter that JC had already dismantled) that, yes he would be unbeaten, being that Kessler is the only one to beat him

Eubank was in his prime when joe beat him
Joe is brilliant at choosing the right time to fight fighters.
Anyway, all this proves is that undefeated fighters arent always going to be the goat of any generation just cause of no losses.
Ali was the greatest because he never ducked no fighters and that goes the same to jack johnson and the sugars.
To much politics with boxing now with all this cherry picking crap.
Im trying to remember who i have really wanted joe to fight that has actually happened.
Great fighter..just wish he took more risks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RohanKnight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RohanKnight

Froch has eclipsed Calzaghe now. If he had picked his fights he'd be unbeaten too.


I really do want the Big Man from Nottingham to take Ward, but its asking a lot at 34.

A lot of people think Carl would have got knocked out by JC but I cant see that happening, and most likely the Calzo would get a points victory by going all slappy as is his habit.

---

Well he has lost only once and that was to somebody Calzaghe also fought and beat, so your logic is pretty stupid.

---

yeah i dont understand why its stupid. Have you misread me? You must think I am talkin about who wouldn win in a fight - thats where your counterargument works, but it dont work with my point - I I am talking about their resume. Joe Fraiser has a better resume with bigger wins than Larry Holmes, but Holmes would win in a fight between them.

---

No, I am simply talking about the part of your post I highlighted:

"If he had picked his fights he'd be unbeaten too."

Calzaghe fought and beat the guy that Froch lost to, so Cazlaghe clearly didn't 'pick' a fight that was easier than fights that Froch 'Picked' In fact Froch lost to an already beaten fighter. Calzgahe beat an unbeaten one.

I agree that if Froch had 'picked' differently (and avoided the fighter that JC had already dismantled) that, yes he would be unbeaten, being that Kessler is the only one to beat him

---

I see your point, but my point refers to the other 48 fighters Calzaghe picked, rather than that 1/48th part of the evidence you are highlighting.

So who should JC have fought at SMW, that was operating at SMW that he didn't - coz in all the years nobody has come up with a compelling story. Fact is in was a shite division, but that ain't Calzaghe's fault.

PS - Froch is my favourite fighter in the world right now

The end of the day it's about MONEY, not belt's if the money is right they fight that's the pro game if you like it or not the TRUTH.:end:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

The end of the day it's about MONEY, not belt's if the money is right they fight that's the pro game if you like it or not the TRUTH.:end:

---

Your really strange..are you related to JC.? did he put you up to this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RohanKnight

Froch has eclipsed Calzaghe now. If he had picked his fights he'd be unbeaten too.


I really do want the Big Man from Nottingham to take Ward, but its asking a lot at 34.

A lot of people think Carl would have got knocked out by JC but I cant see that happening, and most likely the Calzo would get a points victory by going all slappy as is his habit.

---

Well he has lost only once and that was to somebody Calzaghe also fought and beat, so your logic is pretty stupid.

---

I don't know about comfortable... my memory was that until later in the fight when Joe adapted, Kessler was able to give Joe quite a bit of trouble.

Carl fought a more experienced Kessler in his own backyard and gave him a VERY close fight.

It was also Kessler going for bust... if he'd lost to Froch after his previous fights then his career would have been well and truly over... I can't see him able to get more motivated than that.

You also have to consider the fact that Kessler had been able to watch the iteration of Carl that he was fighting in the ring with multiple other elite SMWs making his flaws look a lot more obvious and exploitable. Can the same really be said of Joe Calzaghe? Would Hopkins or Kessler really be able to learn much about the version of Joe they were fighting by watching him happy slap Peter Manfredo's arms for a few minutes?

I think Joe probably UDs Carl... but I really don't think there can be much denying that Froch's recent run beats any of Joe's in terms of consistent class in opponents and performances.

46 AND 0 for the record dont you like fighter's that WIN what's wrong with people JOE IS A WINNER it seem's to me just sour grape's, all this crap about slaping just ask Eubank.;D

Who doesn't like Joe?

Sometimes bored trolls and/or fan boys like yourself need to be given a little bit of perspective, but that doesn't mean that the people doing so have to dislike the fighter in question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Eubank was in his prime when joe beat him
Joe is brilliant at choosing the right time to fight fighters.
Anyway, all this proves is that undefeated fighters arent always going to be the goat of any generation just cause of no losses.
Ali was the greatest because he never ducked no fighters and that goes the same to jack johnson and the sugars.
To much politics with boxing now with all this cherry picking crap.
Im trying to remember who i have really wanted joe to fight that has actually happened.
Great fighter..just wish he took more risks.

---

no he wasnt he was very weight drained

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dia bando

is it because he is FROM WALE'S

---

Why do you have an apostrophe in the word Wales? I'd assume that being from Wales you'd have spelt the word once or twice!

I disagree with you, and I'm a massive Calzaghe fan!


P.s. Eubank was not in his prime! Calzaghe was the 2nd last fighter Eubank fought!

I thibk Imp was being sarcastic... ;)

My i just say i am not a boy, o that word winner i like winner's and this is a boxing FORUM is it not and JC was a boxer was he not. ;D So it must be the 46and 0 record that get's under people's skin but we all dont like a winner do we so that why we have Carl Froch.;D:sheep:

How many posts have you repeated the same shit in now then?

Try harder troll... again - nobody here is hating on Calzaghe... just trying to give your little fanboy/poor attempt at trolling arse a bit of perspective.

46-0 is impressive and he has some decent names on his resume... but how can there not be questions?

Froch has lost one close fight against an elite SMW and won several others... that hardly makes him a loser. Infact a lot of British people dislike Froch because they see him as 'arogant' (ie: possessing a winner's attitude).

It seems that you should like Froch a lot more than you do... but he's obviously upset you over your boy.

Lol thanks adam..at least someone noticed.
Manfredo was past his prime though