P4P Top 10??

In many boxing publications or newspapers nearly every time Froch is mentioned so his amazing run of fights. (Excluding Kessler)

Taylor
Dirrell
Abraham
Pascal
Johnson

You tell me five better opponents that Ward has beat.

 

Well, he actually beat Kessler who is better than all of those. Not only that, but Froch lost to Kessler. So theres your reason for Ward being above Froch, not being 'ludicrous'.

As well as the fact Ward dominates people, Froch scraped through against Dirrell and didn't even win in my eyes, same with Taylor it wasn't clear cut until the 12th which isn't really telling me he should be above Ward who is never troubled.

 

I agree with TFFP here.

Froch has had a series of quality, workmanlike wins over top opposition.

Ward had had clear victories over a few tough contenders, but trounced the (at the time) no.1 in the division, and who went on to beat Froch clearly.

There's depth, and there's astounding performance(s). It really is 'what you like'.

No worries an yways, we'll soon see who the better man is :good

 

Ah yes them dominating wins over Allan Green, Sakio Bika! Given the fact he only fights in his back garden every time. Styles make fights and thats why Kessler and Froch went to war in which Froch lost narrowly AWAY from Nottingham. Saying that the Kessler fight cancels out Froch's wins over them 5 is daft as well.

 

It doesn't 'cancel them out' though does it?

It's one stupendous win; which Frochy doesn 't have.

And don't tar Bika, a tough, awkward contender with serious power, with the same brush as Green.

I agree Froch gets bonus point for fighting away. Ward gets bonus points for definitive wins in his last four fights. As I say, they're pretty mucch neck and neck at the moment, depending on your criteria.

8-4 is not exactly narrow either.

 

It's not just them 5. Abraham = Abraham, they both have the same easy win over the limited Abraham.

Froch didn't really beat Dirrell in any conclusive way, so why should we give him a lot of credit for it? You mention Ward fighting in his backyard but the only guy with a hometown decision is Mr Carl Froch of the two so really that just hows one eyed you are about this.

And yes, beating Kessler CLEARLY, i.e. completely dominating him while Froch gets clearly beaten by Kessler is a pretty large dent into wins over the overrated Jean Pascal and a come from behind victory against Jermain Taylor and Johnson. To say the least.

 

Regardless of 'overrated' (though I can't see how his skill set was overrated...no one ever rated him on anything other than pure athleticism I think ) Pascal did go on to be the linear no.1 at the weght above and beat a guy who WAS genuinely overrated in Dawson, and put B-Hop down a few times in a close first fight.

That is a top-notch win for Froch; his jab bossed the fight late on.

Very good win IMO; due to what happened afterwards :good

 

Take away their common opponents and Ward's best wins are Bika and Green, whereas Froch's are Taylor, Pascal, Johnson and Dirrell. Ward has been hyped into this unstoppable super middleweight machine, Froch will put the record straight come the end of October.

:deal

 

Bollocks mate, did you see how long people on here were dining off the 'Beat Pascal who went on to win a light heavyweight title' line. Clearly people thought Pascal was pretty damn good when I think he's pretty damn average for a world champion and I never strayed from that opinion and getting not only beat by Hopkins (I can accept that), but actually outhustled is frankly embarrassing.

I did think Dawson would beat him and think he really should be beating Pascal, but obviously Dawson's mental fragilities are worse than Pascal's physical and technical deficiencies.

 

Whats the point in taking away the common opponent? Thats a great reference point for who is the better p4p talent. That would be completely nonsensical, but convenient for you if you're trying to make this case that Ward can not be above him

How about we take away Froch's last 6 wins while we're at it, then I'd say Bute is above him. :tired

 

My P4P top 10 is as follows:

1 ) Manny Pacquiao
2 ) Juan Manuel Marquez
3 ) Sergio Martinez
4 ) Wladimir Klitschko
5 ) Nonito Donaire
6 ) Bernard Hopkins
7 ) Yuriorkis Gamboa
8 ) Andre Ward
9 ) Carl Froch
10 ) Giovanni Segura

I'd have ranked Floyd either #1 or #2, but due to his inactivity I find that hard to justify.

 

I quite like the above list, except for Wladimir. I wouldn't even have him in a top 10.

 

How many Froch fans decided to invent a new scoring criteria for the Dirrell fight?

A criteria in which being the only fighter to land clean, effective punches is counteracted by the fact you're being "boring" and falling down sometimes.

And a criteria in which trying and very much failing to land anything is considered to be "effective aggression" as opposed to just giving a shite offensive display.

The only ludicrous thing here is the fact that someone thinks Carl Froch is the 6/7 best fighter in the sport.

 

I said that anyway: have NEVER bought into the 'Bad' Chad hype, he is whack.

B-Hop, even at his age, is a master hustler. Not embarrassing at all, just confirms Pascal isn't an 'Elite' level fighter. Pascal was a decent enough fighter IMO, nothing great (terrible engine; only capable of pot shotting or brawling, nothing in between) but Frochs win over him is a decent one. At 168, it's as good a win as any of Wards wins (other than Mikkel of course)

As I say, at one point, Pascal was the no.1 at 175. If anything, it's a quality achievment for a less than dynamic fighter.

But Dawson Man, I couldn't wait for his deficiencies to be shown up, so many people on here seemed to overlook them and claim he was **** hot. I felt like I was bangin' me head against a brick wall

 

No, that's not fair. Whilst Froch did NOTHING of any relevance, Dirrells performance was embarrassing.

As I always say, if run guy is running like ****, the man chasing is only going to look less than stellar. Dirrells style was so negative he deserved to lose.

Because IMO, if you can win a FIGHT like that it shows the sport up. One of the main reasons I don't buy into the Floyd hype, too many bitchlike performances.

Bitchlike=Product of more recent amateur schoolings. Some top amateurs just aren't prepped/don't adapt to the demands of the pro game.

In the arena, on the night, and not seeing that Froch pnches were just falling short, the ebb and flow definitely gave the appearance that Dirrell was an absolute joker and Froch was only in trouble once. Literally, from where I was sitting Froch won that fight.

Of course, a subsequent viewing on TV the next day......;-)