Originally Posted by Earl-hickey
There was a poll in the general the other week, whos greater Froch or Calzaghe, and like 85% voted for Froch
yet in here, i think most would agree it's Calzaghe
Why the discrepancy?
I presume the yanks thought that Calzaghe was looked after and didn't fight the top guys in his division until later on in his career whereas Froch fights anyone anywhere which is what the Americans like. Ability wise Calzaghe was the best but what he actually achieved compared to his ability was nothing. The guy should of been undisputed super middleweight champion of the world 5 years before he was and then should of taken all comers at 175 but for some reason didn't want to. His 0 was too important to him.