The best

[Violent Demise]

Let me get this right - Froch has ecplised Cazlaghe even though he lost to a man Calzaghe comfortably beat?

Calzaghe schools Kessler. Froch loses to Kessler. That makes Froch better? Hmmm....

If FRoch-Calzaghe ever happened there's only one winner. Froch is a tortoise for Calzaghe. Borderline mismatch.

Of course. Everybody knows Fighter A would never beat Fighter B. Cuz Fighter A lost to Fighter C. And Fighter B beat Fighter C.

The triangle theory. A true sign of desperation

Nothing to do with that.

Calzaghe and Froch are basically fighters from different eras. Froch didn't turn pro until FIVE years after Calzaghe beat Chris Eubank.

How can Calzaghe be matched against Froch's current opposition when he's retired? Likewise how can Froch be matched against Calzaghe's opposition considering he wasn't around in that era? It's nothing but guesswork.

However, they have a common opponent. Mikkel Kessler. He is arguably the best supermiddleweight either have faced. Calzaghe beat him when he was unbeaten. Froch LOST to him after Calzaghe had beaten him.

That right there is a pretty telling formline.

Now consider this - Has Froch ever been regarded as THE man at supermiddle? No. Was Calzaghe THE man at supermiddle? Yes.

So how has Froch eclipsed him? Not only does Calzaghe have the stronger form, albeit from a limit crop, he is also down in history as the TRUE champion of his division during his era.

Froch ain't eclipsed shit.

I don't think he's eclipsed him either. But he's clearly shown a lot more desire to fight tough opposition than Calzaghe ever did

Taking on Lacy (at the point where everybody thought Lacy was 'The Man') showed desire to fight tough opposition. Taking on Kessler, who was unbeaten and many peoples number 1 in the division showed desire to fight tough opposition. Going over to USA to fight Hopkins (a fight sandwiched by wins over Tarver, Wright and Pavlik, and still Hopkins last defeat and only defeat at 175) showed desire to fight tough opposition.

Fighting them eventually and actually wanting to fight them are 2 different things. Calzaghe almost seemed forced into his big fights. The Lacy fight was postponed twice. And many say the fight would of never happened if his dad didn't make him stick with it. The Kessler fight took forever to make. And was filled with all kinds of back and forth bullshit. The Hopkins fight wasn't as difficult to make cuz Hopkins went looking for him.

[RohanKnight]

[QUOTE=Fenster;1014557][QUOTE=RohanKnight;1014534]

That's a bit silly.

Has Hopkins "gassed out" since fighting Calzaghe? No. Hopkins has ENHANCED his reputation.

These are the facts - Hopkins was in GREAT form before he fought Cazlaghe - beating Winky and Tarver - loses to Calzaghe - then shows great form to beat Pavlik, Ornelas, Jones and Pascal.

So Hopkins only lost to Calzaghe because he got old. However, he hasn't lost since and has defeated P4P fighters much younger than Calzaghe was.

Hmmmm........

none of the fighters Bernard has beat since fight with the same pace and fitnes as Joe. Fitness was Calzaghe's biggest weapon, his engine was supreme, just kept on running. And thats how he won, JC simply kept on going at a higher pace for longer, slapping up points with his machine gun approach till Bhop started faking low punches to get air. After all theres not much else a grandfather do against that that kind of pace.

The fact remains that B-hop simply couldnt keep up with Joe supreme conditioning at such a late stage in his career, but nonetheless came very close to taking the fight. If he'd had the fitness to do what he was doing for 2 more rounds, say if he was 7-8 years younger, the fight would have been his. Theres absolutely no doubt he would have outclassed JC for more rounds than 4. You dont win the first 4 rounds and then lose almost all the others because your skills are failing you, its becuause of a differece in fitness.

[RohanKnight]

Fighting them eventually and actually wanting to fight them are 2 different things. Calzaghe almost seemed forced into his big fights. The Lacy fight was postponed twice. And many say the fight would of never happened if his dad didn't make him stick with it. The Kessler fight took forever to make. And was filled with all kinds of back and forth bullshit. The Hopkins fight wasn't as difficult to make cuz Hopkins went looking for him.

he did however chase Sven Ottke incessantly. Joe was no coward -I would rather say that he was smart enough to know his limits, he knew there were some supermiddleweights around who would decision him by outboxing his slaprate and wouldnt be hurt by his decent power when he was younger.

This then is my issue with this thread - funny its called 'the best' when Joe himself clearly knew for a fact he WASNT the best supermiddleweight around. He did however become the MOST SUCCESSFUL one.

A great smart boxer (Hopsy) or a fast good/great boxer (RJJ) can outpoint a high output speed puncher (calzaghe style 1) or a fairly good boxer (Calzaghe style 2), though I doubt either of them would stop JC or hurt him, possibly just knock him down like they did when they were old.
Quite possible JC would have knocked down RJJ too when he was prime, he had good power.

[Violent Demise]

Let me get this right - Froch has ecplised Cazlaghe even though he lost to a man Calzaghe comfortably beat?

Calzaghe schools Kessler. Froch loses to Kessler. That makes Froch better? Hmmm....

If FRoch-Calzaghe ever happened there's only one winner. Froch is a tortoise for Calzaghe. Borderline mismatch.

Of course. Everybody knows Fighter A would never beat Fighter B. Cuz Fighter A lost to Fighter C. And Fighter B beat Fighter C.

The triangle theory. A true sign of desperation

Nothing to do with that.

Calzaghe and Froch are basically fighters from different eras. Froch didn't turn pro until FIVE years after Calzaghe beat Chris Eubank.

How can Calzaghe be matched against Froch's current opposition when he's retired? Likewise how can Froch be matched against Calzaghe's opposition considering he wasn't around in that era? It's nothing but guesswork.

However, they have a common opponent. Mikkel Kessler. He is arguably the best supermiddleweight either have faced. Calzaghe beat him when he was unbeaten. Froch LOST to him after Calzaghe had beaten him.

That right there is a pretty telling formline.

Now consider this - Has Froch ever been regarded as THE man at supermiddle? No. Was Calzaghe THE man at supermiddle? Yes.

So how has Froch eclipsed him? Not only does Calzaghe have the stronger form, albeit from a limit crop, he is also down in history as the TRUE champion of his division during his era.

Froch ain't eclipsed shit.

I don't think he's eclipsed him either. But he's clearly shown a lot more desire to fight tough opposition than Calzaghe ever did

Taking on Lacy (at the point where everybody thought Lacy was 'The Man') showed desire to fight tough opposition. Taking on Kessler, who was unbeaten and many peoples number 1 in the division showed desire to fight tough opposition. Going over to USA to fight Hopkins (a fight sandwiched by wins over Tarver, Wright and Pavlik, and still Hopkins last defeat and only defeat at 175) showed desire to fight tough opposition.

[QUOTE=RohanKnight;1014575][QUOTE=Fenster;1014557]

That's a bit silly.

Has Hopkins "gassed out" since fighting Calzaghe? No. Hopkins has ENHANCED his reputation.

These are the facts - Hopkins was in GREAT form before he fought Cazlaghe - beating Winky and Tarver - loses to Calzaghe - then shows great form to beat Pavlik, Ornelas, Jones and Pascal.

So Hopkins only lost to Calzaghe because he got old. However, he hasn't lost since and has defeated P4P fighters much younger than Calzaghe was.

Hmmmm........

Fitness was Calzaghe's biggest weapon, his engine was supreme, just kept on running.

Them 10 lines of coke he snorted I'm sure helped keep that engine running

[imp]

I agree with the below statement mentioned
"I have no problem with acknowledging that JC is the 3rd-5th best SM ever, behind Bhop, RJJ, Sugar Ray etc,"
As also said joes fitness was amazing and he was a great boxer but i still will never put him in front of the greatest and thats a prime RJJ.
joe and frank could have made a catchweight with him at anytime but he did not..RJJ was the best during these eras and easily played with future hall of famers hopkins and detroits finest james toney.

He took risks and went out of his comfort zone and weight class many times and proved he was a p4p
champ!
Joe was and is a great champion it definately proves that just cause your undefeated dont mean your the greatest..and that goes to floyd as well.
Long live RJJ, Ali and..and the best of all things british...nigel benn

[Dia bando]

What supermiddle had record like JC, well NONE RJJ B Hopp Kessler to name a few will never have a 46 AND 0 record and all 3 have been in with bum oppostion dont kid yourself. You could say Froch has been in with better oppostion look at his age he is geting on turning pro late 20's.So Carl has to get on with it time is not on his side. B Hopp is just a dirty fighter and he doe's come across as a A hole,i dont like the way he fight's.

[BIG H]

[QUOTE=Violent Demise;1014601]

Let me get this right - Froch has ecplised Cazlaghe even though he lost to a man Calzaghe comfortably beat?

Calzaghe schools Kessler. Froch loses to Kessler. That makes Froch better? Hmmm....

If FRoch-Calzaghe ever happened there's only one winner. Froch is a tortoise for Calzaghe. Borderline mismatch.

Of course. Everybody knows Fighter A would never beat Fighter B. Cuz Fighter A lost to Fighter C. And Fighter B beat Fighter C.

The triangle theory. A true sign of desperation

Nothing to do with that.

Calzaghe and Froch are basically fighters from different eras. Froch didn't turn pro until FIVE years after Calzaghe beat Chris Eubank.

How can Calzaghe be matched against Froch's current opposition when he's retired? Likewise how can Froch be matched against Calzaghe's opposition considering he wasn't around in that era? It's nothing but guesswork.

However, they have a common opponent. Mikkel Kessler. He is arguably the best supermiddleweight either have faced. Calzaghe beat him when he was unbeaten. Froch LOST to him after Calzaghe had beaten him.

That right there is a pretty telling formline.

Now consider this - Has Froch ever been regarded as THE man at supermiddle? No. Was Calzaghe THE man at supermiddle? Yes.

So how has Froch eclipsed him? Not only does Calzaghe have the stronger form, albeit from a limit crop, he is also down in history as the TRUE champion of his division during his era.

Froch ain't eclipsed shit.

I don't think he's eclipsed him either. But he's clearly shown a lot more desire to fight tough opposition than Calzaghe ever did

Taking on Lacy (at the point where everybody thought Lacy was 'The Man') showed desire to fight tough opposition. Taking on Kessler, who was unbeaten and many peoples number 1 in the division showed desire to fight tough opposition. Going over to USA to fight Hopkins (a fight sandwiched by wins over Tarver, Wright and Pavlik, and still Hopkins last defeat and only defeat at 175) showed desire to fight tough opposition.

[QUOTE=RohanKnight;1014575]

That's a bit silly.

Has Hopkins "gassed out" since fighting Calzaghe? No. Hopkins has ENHANCED his reputation.

These are the facts - Hopkins was in GREAT form before he fought Cazlaghe - beating Winky and Tarver - loses to Calzaghe - then shows great form to beat Pavlik, Ornelas, Jones and Pascal.

So Hopkins only lost to Calzaghe because he got old. However, he hasn't lost since and has defeated P4P fighters much younger than Calzaghe was.

Hmmmm........

Fitness was Calzaghe's biggest weapon, his engine was supreme, just kept on running.

Them 10 lines of coke he snorted I'm sure helped keep that engine running

There is no point in debating anything regarding UK fighters with you, because for all your knowledge, you just cannot be objective in that area. If JC was from somewhere else, you would have a different opinion, but your brain will not allow you to believe that being born across the Atlantic still allows you to be a great fighter. If Joel Casamyor was British you would pick every part of his record to pieces

[RohanKnight]

What supermiddle had record like JC, well NONE RJJ B Hopp Kessler to name a few will never have a 46 AND 0 record and all 3 have been in with bum oppostion dont kid yourself. You could say Froch has been in with better oppostion look at his age he is geting on turning pro late 20's.So Carl has to get on with it time is not on his side. B Hopp is just a dirty fighter and he doe's come across as a A hole,i dont like the way he fight's.

I think the record argument has been worn out. Rocky Marciano was 49-0 but hes not close to being the best heavyweight ever. Julio Cesar Chavez could have kept his record clean forever by fighting bums. Both great fighters though, as was JC.

There is always going to be that unknown factor about Joe, you can mount an argument for saying he was the best but didnt shine with the best prime which means just Kessler really. You can however mount that for several SMs, you can say equally that RJJ never reached his potential, even though what he reached was incredible, he could have gone beyond it with more commitment, you could see him reigning the SM division undefeated for decade if he'd had the desire. But even though there is much more talent west of the Atlantic by virtue of a sheer population difference focused on boxing, it never means that there arent individuals with that talent over in Britain. And one thing you have to admit about Joe C is that he desired to remain champion, to put in the slog for a decade, and that deserves respect, I wouldnt do it!

I dont think Froch comes into the argument of top SMs ever(as yet anyway), I dont know if it was me who mentioned him but sorry I did, I was only pointing out his resume is now better.

[Fenster]

none of the fighters Bernard has beat since fight with the same pace and fitnes as Joe. Fitness was Calzaghe's biggest weapon, his engine was supreme, just kept on running. And thats how he won, JC simply kept on going at a higher pace for longer, slapping up points with his machine gun approach till Bhop started faking low punches to get air. After all theres not much else a grandfather do against that that kind of pace.

The fact remains that B-hop simply couldnt keep up with Joe supreme conditioning at such a late stage in his career, but nonetheless came very close to taking the fight. If he'd had the fitness to do what he was doing for 2 more rounds, say if he was 7-8 years younger, the fight would have been his. Theres absolutely no doubt he would have outclassed JC for more rounds than 4. You dont win the first 4 rounds and then lose almost all the others because your skills are failing you, its becuause of a differece in fitness.

Hmm.. that's pretty flawed reasoning.

If Hopkins was 7-8 years younger so would Calzaghe be. That means Calzaghe is even fresher, faster and hits a whole lot harder because his brittle old hands aren't as bad.

Then you have to look at all the other factors - Hopkins had home advantage (consistently proves to play a huge role in the outcome of a fight), it was Calzaghe's first fight at the weight, he was the favourite. It's a totally different fight in every aspect.

AS for Calzaghe winning just because of fitness.... Hopkins hit Calzaghe LESS than he has any other fighter from Jermain Taylor to Pascal. I think that proves Calzaghe had a little more than just fitness going for him

[Violent Demise]

[QUOTE=BIG H;1014718][QUOTE=Violent Demise;1014601]

Let me get this right - Froch has ecplised Cazlaghe even though he lost to a man Calzaghe comfortably beat?

Calzaghe schools Kessler. Froch loses to Kessler. That makes Froch better? Hmmm....

If FRoch-Calzaghe ever happened there's only one winner. Froch is a tortoise for Calzaghe. Borderline mismatch.

Of course. Everybody knows Fighter A would never beat Fighter B. Cuz Fighter A lost to Fighter C. And Fighter B beat Fighter C.

The triangle theory. A true sign of desperation

Nothing to do with that.

Calzaghe and Froch are basically fighters from different eras. Froch didn't turn pro until FIVE years after Calzaghe beat Chris Eubank.

How can Calzaghe be matched against Froch's current opposition when he's retired? Likewise how can Froch be matched against Calzaghe's opposition considering he wasn't around in that era? It's nothing but guesswork.

However, they have a common opponent. Mikkel Kessler. He is arguably the best supermiddleweight either have faced. Calzaghe beat him when he was unbeaten. Froch LOST to him after Calzaghe had beaten him.

That right there is a pretty telling formline.

Now consider this - Has Froch ever been regarded as THE man at supermiddle? No. Was Calzaghe THE man at supermiddle? Yes.

So how has Froch eclipsed him? Not only does Calzaghe have the stronger form, albeit from a limit crop, he is also down in history as the TRUE champion of his division during his era.

Froch ain't eclipsed shit.

I don't think he's eclipsed him either. But he's clearly shown a lot more desire to fight tough opposition than Calzaghe ever did

Taking on Lacy (at the point where everybody thought Lacy was 'The Man') showed desire to fight tough opposition. Taking on Kessler, who was unbeaten and many peoples number 1 in the division showed desire to fight tough opposition. Going over to USA to fight Hopkins (a fight sandwiched by wins over Tarver, Wright and Pavlik, and still Hopkins last defeat and only defeat at 175) showed desire to fight tough opposition.

That's a bit silly.

Has Hopkins "gassed out" since fighting Calzaghe? No. Hopkins has ENHANCED his reputation.

These are the facts - Hopkins was in GREAT form before he fought Cazlaghe - beating Winky and Tarver - loses to Calzaghe - then shows great form to beat Pavlik, Ornelas, Jones and Pascal.

So Hopkins only lost to Calzaghe because he got old. However, he hasn't lost since and has defeated P4P fighters much younger than Calzaghe was.

Hmmmm........

Fitness was Calzaghe's biggest weapon, his engine was supreme, just kept on running.

Them 10 lines of coke he snorted I'm sure helped keep that engine running

There is no point in debating anything regarding UK fighters with you, because for all your knowledge, you just cannot be objective in that area. If JC was from somewhere else, you would have a different opinion, but your brain will not allow you to believe that being born across the Atlantic still allows you to be a great fighter. If Joel Casamyor was British you would pick every part of his record to pieces

I could of swore Casamayor was born in London

[erics44]

I think he pretty much did fight the best guys available, but he was in a relatively weak era.

Agreed on both counts.

Kessler was his best win imo. Bute, Ward, Dirrel and Froch would all have been better than anybody else that he fought. BUT...he did beat the best available and we cannot knocked that and who's to say that he wouldn't have beaten better fighters had they been available.

better than dominating hopkins?

[Fenster]

I think he pretty much did fight the best guys available, but he was in a relatively weak era.

Agreed on both counts.

Kessler was his best win imo. Bute, Ward, Dirrel and Froch would all have been better than anybody else that he fought. BUT...he did beat the best available and we cannot knocked that and who's to say that he wouldn't have beaten better fighters had they been available.

better than dominating hopkins?

He specifically means supermiddles.

[Master]

I agree with the below statement mentioned
"I have no problem with acknowledging that JC is the 3rd-5th best SM ever, behind Bhop, RJJ, Sugar Ray etc,"
As also said joes fitness was amazing and he was a great boxer but i still will never put him in front of the greatest and thats a prime RJJ.
joe and frank could have made a catchweight with him at anytime but he did not..RJJ was the best during these eras and easily played with future hall of famers hopkins and detroits finest james toney.

He took risks and went out of his comfort zone and weight class many times and proved he was a p4p
champ!
Joe was and is a great champion it definately proves that just cause your undefeated dont mean your the greatest..and that goes to floyd as well.
Long live RJJ, Ali and..and the best of all things british...nigel benn

Sugar Ray Leonard was not a great super middleweight. He would have got beaten by Joe Galzaghe, Toney and Roy Jones.

[imp]

And joe would have been beaten by roy and tony.

[Dia bando]

Sorry Imp i dont think so he only had to beat Tony as he had beaten RJJ, how do think Ward and Froch will go.