Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-27-2012, 05:53 AM   #31
Nipple
I hate my username
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

I have to say Yes.

Just look at the records! Even Joe has got respect for what Carl has done, and deep down you know he wishes that he would of done the same.

I had to laugh at Joe on Ringside on Thursday when being mentioned in the same breath as "Fighting in the opponents back yard" etc. Joe did next to no travelling. The Millenium Stadium was a mission for him, let alone somewhere in Europe.

Joe took the easy way out until he got backed into a corner (Lacey/Kessler/Hopkins etc). He could of done so much more! He could of faced Dawson or Pavlik (He would of splattered Kelly) or even Froch (Now, how good would THAT of looked if Joe would of beaten Carl?) but he was so obsessed with his "0" that he retired.

I really like Joe, but he has no heart.
Nipple is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 05-27-2012, 06:01 AM   #32
Prescott_Fan
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 777
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill C84 View Post
Other than Hopkins, Kessler and possibly Lacy who did Joe fight that was worth a damn?
I'm not sure i see your point? This is about who has the better record isn't it?

It's actually quite easy to dissect Froch's record if you really want to. Last night was the first time Froch has beaten a reigning world champion at 168. He'd only ever beaten one former super-middleweight champion previously too, and that was a shot to shit Robin Reid. The other two world champions he faced, Ward and Kessler, both beat him and for me that was a shop-worn Kessler that beat Froch. Calzaghe clearly beat a, IMO, better version of Kessler. Abraham and Taylor have a combined record of 1-6 at super-middle (that win coming in a fight between the two of them), so whilst they have name recognition it's open to question whether or not either were/are particularly good at 168. Pascal blows hot and cold, and he'd not done anything of note at 168 and has had his best wins since moving up to 175.

I like Froch and as a previous poster said he deserves a load of credit for his attitude towards the sport whilst Calzaghe was, for the most part, a shit stain. For that reason people will never be unbiased in this kind of discussion and you'll get loads of people favouring Froch because he is more likeable and has bigger stones, but for me in the cold light of day at this stage Calzaghe still has the better record overall.
Prescott_Fan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:04 AM   #33
Bill C84
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Kent. UK.
Posts: 5,132
vCash: 81
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prescott_Fan View Post
I'm not sure i see your point? This is about who has the better record isn't it?

It's actually quite easy to dissect Froch's record if you really want to. Last night was the first time Froch has beaten a reigning world champion at 168. He'd only ever beaten one former super-middleweight champion previously too, and that was a shot to shit Robin Reid. The other two world champions he faced, Ward and Kessler, both beat him and for me that was a shop-worn Kessler that beat Froch. Calzaghe clearly beat a, IMO, better version of Kessler. Abraham and Taylor have a combined record of 1-6 at super-middle (that win coming in a fight between the two of them), so whilst they have name recognition it's open to question whether or not either were/are particularly good at 168. Pascal blows hot and cold, and he'd not done anything of note at 168 and has had his best wins since moving up to 175.

I like Froch and as a previous poster said he deserves a load of credit for his attitude towards the sport whilst Calzaghe was, for the most part, a shit stain. For that reason people will never be unbiased in this kind of discussion and you'll get loads of people favouring Froch because he is more likeable and has bigger stones, but for me in the cold light of day at this stage Calzaghe still has the better record overall.
That's a fair post I can see the reasoning behind that viewpoint.
Bill C84 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:16 AM   #34
Nipple
I hate my username
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prescott_Fan View Post

but for me in the cold light of day at this stage Calzaghe still has the better record overall.
Joe, is that you?

LOL @ JC's record being better than Froch's!

Carl's Record over the last 3 years is probably better than Joe's overall record.

But then again, with killers like Manfredo i can see your point...
Nipple is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:24 AM   #35
Prescott_Fan
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 777
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

A very well reasoned argument.

Tit.
Prescott_Fan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:28 AM   #36
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,921
vCash: 75
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Froch beat the future LHW champ'....not quite lineal but if you think Jones surpassed Dariusz at some point Pascal was the man when he beat Sad Chad.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:30 AM   #37
Nipple
I hate my username
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Overall record is better than Carl's, how?

Fighting a shot to shit RJJ? And still getting dropped in the first round?

Beating Hopkins? Carl beat Pascal who beat Dawson who beat Hopkins.

Beating Lacey? Carl beat Bute and Abraham (Basically, Carl had 2 performances like that).

Woodhall? Froch would of been too much for him.

Bika? Good fight! Carl edges it.

Look, every time Joe had an offer for a big fight he had an excuse. Carl hasn't.

Look, say what you will about the Kessler/Froch-Kesller/Joe result, but history will remember Joe as someone who didn't fight the very best available and as somebody that had an excuse for nearly every fight ("Ooh my hands"). It's not like that for Carl.
Nipple is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:32 AM   #38
Prescott_Fan
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 777
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

As i said, Froch clearly has a much better attitude to the sport and that is why people will rate him higher than Calzaghe, whose attitude was shite for many years. That doesn't mean though that Froch has the better record.
Prescott_Fan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:34 AM   #39
Nipple
I hate my username
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

You've dissected Carl's Record, now let's see you did with Joe's please.
Nipple is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:38 AM   #40
Prescott_Fan
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 777
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

You want me to go through how many reigning and former super-middleweight champions Joe beat? Are you sure?
Prescott_Fan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:39 AM   #41
Nipple
I hate my username
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,671
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prescott_Fan View Post
You want me to go through how many reigning and former super-middleweight champions Joe beat? Are you sure?
Oh dear... Yep, i do want you to do it.
Nipple is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:40 AM   #42
TBooze
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South of London
Posts: 10,878
vCash: 765
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nipple View Post
Beating Hopkins? Carl beat Pascal who beat Dawson who beat Hopkins.
Spin like that makes Audley better than Ali:

Ali lost to Berbick, who lost to Snipes, who lost to Gonzales, who lost to Witherspoon, who lost to Nix, who was flattened by A Force...

Anyway Hopkins beat Pascal, who beat Dawson...
TBooze is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:41 AM   #43
CornishWarrior
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 75
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Joe would beat froch if they were both in their prime but carls record is better. I think Calzaghe is probably regretting not taking care of business when froch was calling him out a few years before he retired. If he had fought him, beat him easily then joes record would look a lot better, sadly the fight was not made and probably because froch wouldn't have bought in the money
CornishWarrior is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:41 AM   #44
DOM5153
They Cannot Run Forever
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: norfolk england
Posts: 6,172
vCash: 7562
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nipple View Post
Overall record is better than Carl's, how?

Fighting a shot to shit RJJ? And still getting dropped in the first round?

Beating Hopkins? Carl beat Pascal who beat Dawson who beat Hopkins.

Beating Lacey? Carl beat Bute and Abraham (Basically, Carl had 2 performances like that).

Woodhall? Froch would of been too much for him.

Bika? Good fight! Carl edges it.

Look, every time Joe had an offer for a big fight he had an excuse. Carl hasn't.

Look, say what you will about the Kessler/Froch-Kesller/Joe result, but history will remember Joe as someone who didn't fight the very best available and as somebody that had an excuse for nearly every fight ("Ooh my hands"). It's not like that for Carl.
Joe was unfortunate that his era was slapbang right in the center of two golden periods of the division. I would like to see some of these big offers he recieve because i think you quite simply pulled that out of your arse. I find it funny as **** when people claim that Joe ducked this guy and that guy yet on closer inspection that specific fight was never on the cards or close to concievable. Hopkins was offered a fight in 2001 i believe and turned it down, its a shame some people are not objective enough to flip the coin and look at things from a different perspective because they are two narrowminded to build a well a constructed arguement. I dont doubt that Froch has the better resume at this point but im not so stupid as to not look at the bigger picture and to understand why Joe was so unlucky.
DOM5153 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2012, 06:41 AM   #45
Spearmint Rhino
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Check Hook Boxing
Posts: 2,207
vCash: 500
Default Re: Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

Froch has a better record, in that he's beaten six world class fighters, and a selection of ''good fighters/contenders'' like Magee.

Calzaghe has the wins over Eubank, Kessler and Hopkins, then the likes of Reid, Woodhall, Bika and Lacy.

Calzaghe retired unbeaten and is a stiffer H2H proposition than Carl, who is pretty beatable in all honesty.

The likes of Watson and Benn would both stop him, for instance.

Saying that, Kessler was probably the best prime opponent Calzaghe fought, and that was a fight that Mikkel could have won had he been a bit more adaptable. When Calzaghe was fighting with him he was dominating Joe and landing the rights at will - either straight ones or uppercuts. Hopkins was faded and arguably won.

There really shouldn't be that much between them, but they always will be because Carl has lost and Joe didn't. The fact that Calzaghe would probably beat him isn't particularly relevant.

It's the Floyd/Pac argument all over again. Floyd would handle Manny relatively easily if they fought now, but Pac's record takes a huge, steaming dump on that of Mayweather.
Spearmint Rhino is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013