Non-British perspective: Froch easier to like than was Calzaghe

[Althugz]

That is certainly a fair post Ross, I just don't think Calzaghe ever really wanted to test himself the way Froch does. It's not as if Joe was completely without options and barred from leaving Wales, he must have more or less been content with the way he was being handled. I'm also less and less sure that it would have been a wide points win for Calzaghe every time I see Carl fight.

Exactly, you'll notice I never said Froch would beat Calzaghe. I think Calzaghe would use those b.s flurries that don't land to trick judges into a points win - Carl would never stop working though and not tire like Hopkins did. (which I still thought Hopkins won - boxing isn't scored on punches missed/pitty pats with the inside glove)

Ross, the Eubank fight is a joke example. He was finished and had 2 weeks notice. Even if he fought Collins. Collins was at the tail end. That example just adds to my point imo.

My main point is - regardless who you think would have won if they ever met, when being ranked Carl Froch should be ranked higher than Joe Calzaghe. I don't see an argument to have it any other way.

[Fenster]

Froch will NEVER be ranked above Calzaghe because he's never established himself as the No.1 in the division.

You can rubbish Calzaghe's opposition all you like but the simple fact is - Lacy was the no.1 ranked supermiddle, unbeaten and IBF champion when Calzaghe beat him and Kessler was the no.1 ranked supermiddle, unbeaten and WBC/WBA champion when Calzaghe beat him.

Having tough fights and winning tough fights are two completely different things.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

I meant *Froch over Calzaghe (won't let me edit)

I'm pretty sure Kessler would disagree with you.

[Althugz]

I meant *Froch over Calzaghe (won't let me edit)

I'm pretty sure Kessler would disagree with you.

Oh really? Kess would disagree with me that Froch fought better opposition in 20-25 fights than Calzaghe had in his entire career? Well then he'd be as deluded as most other Brit Calzaghe fans.

Once again people think I'm saying Froch would beat JC if they fought. Never said that. (But of course we'll never know because JC retired with his tail between his legs when Froch called him out)

Fenster, I couldn't give a shit that Calzaghe cleared out his weak as shit SMW division. Jeff Lacy?? L...O...L...

When ranking fighters, the algorithm isn't just "oh well he stayed in his division until the last 2 fights of his career so he's awesome" - No, you look at the whole picture and the FACT is JC NEVER wanted to challenge himself. Never ever ever. For example, a challenge for him was moving up to light heavy to face an old ass Bhop in Vegas (A neutral place tbh) and eeking out a controversial split decision.

As Roy Jones said, "When I was the man in the division, he didn't want to come face me. If I'm the man in this division and he thinks he is the man, then he has to come to me..but now he's the man, I have to play by his rules" or something long those lines.

JC throughout his whole career just told himself and the public he was the best, just sitting there with his WBO belt and his ego without wanting to challenge himself.

I say nothing more on the JC matter because everytime I start - I can't contain my (very reasonable I might add) anger.

He was an absolute waste of talent..and that's a shame. I guess he made a bit of money though so as long as he's happy.

[Kirkland Laing]

Froch is much easier to like then Calzaghe for many reasons.....Froch is a true warrior who takes risks and fights the best, he goes abroad if need be to make the fights happen and he takes fight where he knows he'll be outboxed but believes he can find a way to get the win.......Calzaghe stayed at home fought no hopers and when he did fight names they were in there 40's and i still believe he lost to hopkins.....i've watched the fight many times there no way he landed 220 punches, more like 145-150 and he refused to give hopkins a re-match...he always refused to fight Froch in what would have been a big fight in the uk.

Froch got offered the fight with Calzaghe and bottled it.

[Fenster]

Althugz,

Your personal opinion of Calzaghe and his opposition is utterly irrelevant. There's not one single argument that could possibly rate Froch over Calzaghe.

You can only fight who is in your era. History shows us that Calzaghe unified the entire supermiddle division. He gained universal recognition by beating his highest ranked rivals. He cemented his place in history as being THE man at 168. It's an irrefutable fact.

Your argument is the equivalent of saying - Alan Wells is NOT the 1980 Olympic 100 metre champion because some top sprinters weren't involved. The ONLY thing history records is that Alan Wells was THE man in 1980. He has the gold medal to prove it.

Roy Jones was a light-heavyweight BEFORE Calzaghe had even fought Eubank. How the flying fuck does a British champion, who no-one on earth knows exists, get a fight with the P4P no.1 fighter in the world in a weight-class he doesn't even fight in?

Your entire argument is nonsensical. Fact.

[p4pking]

I'm fairly sure all anyone has done is rate Frochs opposition higher than Calzaghes, no? Your first sentence all but defeats itself. Fact.

[Fenster]

I'm fairly sure all anyone has done is rate Frochs opposition higher than Calzaghes, no? Your first sentence all but defeats itself. Fact.

I was responding to this.

My main point is - when being ranked Carl Froch should be ranked higher than Joe Calzaghe. I don't see an argument to have it any other way.

1. I've already showed why that doesn't work.

2. How can Froch's opposition be that much superior when Calzaghe BEAT a man Froch LOST against?

It's a silly argument. You might as well say Glenn Johnson is the greatest of all time because, although he lost a million times, he fought everyone.

Froch has arguably had the toughest run of fights in supermiddle history. Tougher than not just Calzaghe's but - Jones, Toney, Benn, Eubank, Collins, Kessler, Ward, etc

It doesn't mean he rates ABOVE them. Fact.

[p4pking]

I'm fairly sure all anyone has done is rate Frochs opposition higher than Calzaghes, no? Your first sentence all but defeats itself. Fact.

I was responding to this.

My main point is - when being ranked Carl Froch should be ranked higher than Joe Calzaghe. I don't see an argument to have it any other way.

1. I've already showed why that doesn't work.

2. How can Froch's opposition be that much superior when Calzaghe BEAT a man Froch LOST against?

It's a silly argument. You might as well say Glenn Johnson is the greatest of all time because, although he lost a million times, he fought everyone.

Froch has arguably had the toughest run of fights in supermiddle history. Tougher than not just Calzaghe's but - Jones, Toney, Benn, Eubank, Collins, Kessler, Ward, etc

It doesn't mean he rates ABOVE them. Fact.

Fair enough, it's kind of hard to read both of your posts in full once you get going about Calzaghe. I actually thought Froch deserved the nod against Kessler, and by any measure should rank well ahead of Eubank, Benn and Collins by this point.
Really though, who gives a damn where anyone "ranks" once they have retired. I would imagine it's safe to say Froch will now be remembered more fondly and has garnered a bigger fanbase than Calzaghe ever had, that's all I really took the thread to mean.

[ross]

I dont even think Froch is as liked as Calzaghe was.

Calzaghe fought Kessler in a stadium that could hold 55,000 people. Froch fought Bute in a stadium that could only hold 9,000. Calzaghes fight was a sellout. None of the major tv networks in america wanted the Froch fight.

I like Froch, he has won me around by his hard working attitude. If an arrogant pompous attitude is what turns you which is why you may not like Calzaghe, then you should remember to before Calzaghe retired when Froch was calling him out non stop. Froch hadnt even fought a former world title challenger at that point and was not at all known. Robin Reid whp was retired for a few years after getting beaten by Lacy was Frochs first former world title challenger opponent. Froch is just as guilty for the cockyness. At least Calzaghe was head and shoulders above everyone else, he had a right to hold himself in high esteem. Like we have all mentioned, Calzaghe dominated Kessler and there was no argument who wan. This was 3 years before Froch lost to him and while he was still unbeaten. Kessler was seen as more of a threat than Bute was this weekend. There were question marks over Butes resiliance from the Andrade fight.

[p4pking]

That could be, I really don't know how to guage how popular a fighter is these days. Calzaghe was certainly never an entity outside of the UK either, which was largely his fault imo. As far as cockiness or anything like that, I couldn't really care less. I've only seen a couple of interviews with Froch or Calzaghe for that matter, and they both came across as perfectly decent if not even humble.

[p4pking]

Lacy was also seen as more of a threat to Calzaghe than Kessler was, even though he'd shown all kinds of vulnerability against lesser fighters as well. Doesn't always tell the story.

[Master]

Joe would beat Froch but Carl has taken on better fighters over a shorter period mainly because of his age. Had he been younger Froch would have taken it a little slower.

[Althugz]

Althugz,

Your personal opinion of Calzaghe and his opposition is utterly irrelevant. There's not one single argument that could possibly rate Froch over Calzaghe.

You can only fight who is in your era. History shows us that Calzaghe unified the entire supermiddle division. He gained universal recognition by beating his highest ranked rivals. He cemented his place in history as being THE man at 168. It's an irrefutable fact.

Your argument is the equivalent of saying - Alan Wells is NOT the 1980 Olympic 100 metre champion because some top sprinters weren't involved. The ONLY thing history records is that Alan Wells was THE man in 1980. He has the gold medal to prove it.

Roy Jones was a light-heavyweight BEFORE Calzaghe had even fought Eubank. How the flying fuck does a British champion, who no-one on earth knows exists, get a fight with the P4P no.1 fighter in the world in a weight-class he doesn't even fight in?

Your entire argument is nonsensical. Fact.

Oh you do make me chuckle. As p4p kindly already stated, you stumbled straight out of the blocks.

You proceed with a bunch of whacky analagies that make zero sense or have any relevance. Sprinting?? Haha you're an absolute moron..

Most people understood my argument even if they didn't wholeheartedly agree with it. I wonder if your man crush would be so great if JC wasn't Welsh? Would you see his glaring misgivings then? Why can most neutrals see it where you can't?

The only irrefutable "fact" is that this forum loses all credibility by having an absolute douche lord of a moderator like you.

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

...Handbags at dawn fellas