Cotto or froch?

[Tam Seddon]

What's the point in comparing them? They are both amazing entertainers and have consistently given their all.

.... But to answer the question ( ) Id say Cotto is the better boxer but like Memphis once said "Froch has to be the best shit boxer there ever was"

Carl Froch is everything Tony Margarito wished he was.

I think his boxing ability is underrated, fair enough he can get sloppy at times, but he wouldnt have got to the stage he is at now if he wasnt a good boxer. Hes just got a different style which some people think is shit, but it surely does get the job done as he has proved throughout his career. Ward who is probably one of the best fighters in the world right now gives Froch a lot of credit for his performances and said it was no doubt the hardest fight he had in his career. If Froch started a bit earlier you never know he could have done something in that fight. I hope Froch beats Kessler and Bute and maybe has one more go for Ward. If he could win those three fights he know doubt goes down as one of the greatest 168 fighters of all time.

[Master]

Probably Froch coming off a great win against an undefeated champion whereas Cotto lost to p4p smaller fighter at his weight. Cotto could argue that he is the best at his weight but Froch cannot say the same thing. Although I believe Ward is underrated and is equally as good as Floyd.