Better Top 5 Wins at SMW: Froch or Calzaghe?

Definitely Froch's.

 

Calling it "great" may be stretching it, i'll admit that. But Eubank was still a very good fighter, after he was beaten by Calzaghe he went to cruiser and gave Thompson a good run for his money.. So Eubank was far from done or shot as many claims.

 

Spot on mate

 

I feel that Kessler has a good shot at winning, and as a fan i am optimistic that he can pull it off... But if the fight is as close as the 1st one, then i can see Froch winning a narrow decision or getting a draw...
But Kessler has worked with Montaya for some time now, where Froch was Kessler's first under Montaya (Montaya had worked with the Kessler camp before though). Kessler was also coming off a bad loss to Andre Ward and needed to take time off afterwards. Kessler's physical coach has also told that Kessler is performing better than what he did 2 years ago..

If Kessler can come in, in better condition than in the first fight, if he sticks to Montaya's gameplan, edges the close rounds and doesn't get rattled by the hostile crowd.. Then i see another W for the Viking warrior.

 

I think Froch would stop Kessler in a rematch.

As a fan of both (genuinely) I'm not all that fussed for seeing it.

Kessler looked pretty much shot against Green to me. He's barely 75% of what he was against Froch in most departments.... and Froch has come on since then.

I'd like Kessler to retire. Nothing to prove.

 

How different is it to Wards win over Kessler?

It was Wards 21st fight, Ward was 25
It was Calzaghes 23rd fight, Calzaghe was 25

Ward won at home
Calzaghe won away

When Ward beat Kessler, Kessler was 42-1-0
When Calzaghe beat Eubank, Eubank was 45-2-2

Kessler was 31
Eubank was 31

Kessler was 8-1 in world title fights
Eubank was 17-2-2 in world title fights

It was just under 3 years since Kessler beat a world rated opponent
It was just under 3 years since Eubank beat a world rated opponent

Kessler had only fought 3 completed rounds in 1 fight in a year before fighting Ward
Eubank had only fought 7 completed rounds in 2 fights in a year before fighting Calzaghe

Kesslers only loss was clear
Eubanks 2 losses - first was very close (debateable) the second was a SD, to the same fighter.

Kessler was favourite to win.
100 years of Boxing News claims Calzaghe was underdog, I have read Calzaghe was underdog but some posters claim he was betting favourite, though.

This content is protected

Notes Eubank was a strong favourite, but dont know where the site got its info.

Both Ward and Calzaghe had dominant performances with Calzaghe scoring 2 KDs.

After the loss Kessler beat undefeated WBC champ Froch
After the loss Eubank fought WBO CW champ Thompson and lost a close decision scoring a KD. Eubank fought a return with the bigger Thompson and lost on injury when ahead. Thompson was a CW and the only fighter to have beaten D Haye at CW.

I have read how people on ESB say Eubank was shot so -
How far past prime was Eubank to you then?
Eubank had lost a close decision to Collins, that many thought he won, had a couple of tune ups and rematched Collins to a SD, had a couple of tune ups and lost clearly to underdog Calzaghe. After that loss Eubank went up to CW and challenged world champ Thompson losing a very close decision and then rematched Thompson losing on injury when ahead. Thats Thompson who years later past his best KOd D Haye.
Consider Eubank only had 2 losses to one fighter when he fought Calzaghe, the second by SD to a world champ and was 31 then went on to challenge a big CW flooring him etc, how past his prime do YOU think he was?
Remember Kessler is Wards big win and was the same age as Eubank here and had around the same amount of fights, so is Kessler shot as well, because Kessler has a serious eye problems and was an unwell double vision suffering fighter who has been inactive for a while now due to his injury


Remember when you make silly comments about losses was G Johnson considered past his prime when years ago after losing to Hopkins he went 7-9-2 including the Hopkins loss

Eubank had beaten a top 10 SMW in less than 3 years before facing Calzaghe also :good

 

I didnt watch Arguellos career first hand. Did you then? I have only seen repeated footage and what I have read.
I was a child when Arguellos career was in full flow.
I only like to comment on what I know for sure. That doesnt mean someone isnt a fan of boxing because they dont know the full history of a certain fighter dummy. Cant see what you see as an agenda in that?
Just seems a way for you to pull another duck by the look of it, and avoid questions and responses that stump you

 

I think from your previous comments on the Reid/Malinga fight, that you have not seen the fight, because if you did you would know not much happend in it.
As for Woodhall he has a solid SMW resume and dispatched Nardiello in the middle rounds, after beating him throughout, so how is he not much better? Woodhall has a better SMW resume than Bute

By your post I dont think you saw the Malinga/Nardiello fight either

 

Read before you reply.

 

Calzaghe never faced an opponent as good as Ward so the fact that Froch lost to Ward does not help you in any way. As for Kessler, Froch lost a close competitive fight, which doesn't really hurt his resume.

I notice the fact that you overlook the fact that Taylor got brutally koed by Pavlik at mw, but that doesn't help your clear agenda.

???????????
Let's try this another way. Chris Eubank lost to Collins twice, during the second fight he was throwing around 25 punches per round, which was a clear sign that he had outgrown that division. Collins would offer Eubank a third fight, but Eubank would turn it down.
Two years later Eubank was preparing to fight as a lhw when he would get a offer from ****** to fight for the smw belt. Eubank had 11 days to make a weight class that he had outgrown. To you this is a great win, when the fact is it is only a ok win, not much better than Froch's win over G.Johnson.

??????????
Taylor gave a poor account of himself during his second fight with Hopkins which was the reason why his handlers decided it was maybe time for him to change trainers. The problem was things didn't really change with Taylor getting debateable wins over naturally smaller opponents. During the Pavlik fight he refused to listen to his corners advice and got brutally koed in 7 rounds. In the contract was a rematch clause for a fight at a smw catchweight which Taylor lost due to his inconsistent workrate. Before he had even fought Lacy he was 0-2. According to you we should just completely ignore this and blame the fact that Taylor lost to Froch due to the fact he had put on 8 lbs.

The Taylor who beat Hopkins was the same one who got brutally koed by Pavlik.

In other words anything that doesn't suit your agenda you ignore.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/boxing/article2297179.ece
What do you think is easier draining yourself 7 lbs or draining yourself 14 lbs?

He was fighting at smw for over 4 years. He even fought a smw fight after he lost to Froch.

When you try to argue something you carefully chose the facts which support you and ignore everything else. Taylor who was already on the slide? Johnson who hadn't fought at smw for 5 years? Khan who was boiling himself down to fight in at lww? Hatton who who got ktfo by Pacman at lww? Where are the examples of prime fighters who moved up?

Mayweather:sfw-jmw
Cotto:lww-jmw
Pacquaio:fw-jmw
Jones:jmw-hw
Hopkins:mw-lhw
Dlh:sfw-jmw
Hearns:ww-lhw
srr:ww-lhw
Moore:mw-hw
Calzaghe:smw-lhw
Holyfield:cw-hw
Byrd: lhw-hw

 

You consider Ward better than Hopkins? That's debatable. Froch lost, of course that hurts his resume, especially when we're comparing him to Calzaghe, who clearly beat Kessler.

Thanks for providing even more evidence to support my argument, so Froch beat Taylor when he was 1-2 in his previous 3 fights, and had already been brutally stopped by Taylor. As you know, after suffering KO's some fighters aren't ever the same, and Taylor's career really spiralled after those losses to Pavlik.

I have no idea what your point is here!? How do you rate Jones' win over Toney? Toney was severely drained, does that make the win on a par with Calzaghe-Eubank, Froch-Johnson?

Will you stop trying to make out that Jermain Taylor is just as effective at SMW as he is at MW.

The fact that Taylor was 1-2 and had already been brutally KO'd going into the fight with Froch, is further proof that he wasn't the fighter he was before.

Answer this question General Zod, why has Jermain Taylor returned at MW? Even Jermain Taylor himself seems to disagree with you, hence why he's back to campaigning in the MW division.

Thanks for supporting my argument even further. Clearly, Ricky Hatton was more confident fighting at JWW. As we can see, Hatton didn't want to drain 7lbs and stay at WW. He was happy to drain 14 lbs and drop to JWW. Further supporting my point.

Jean Pascal said himself he was killing himself to make SMW. What did he achieve at SMW? Nothing. He moves up to LHW and become Lineal Champion, defeating the highly rated and undefeated Jean Pascal.

So you have plenty of examples of fighters not being the same in certain weight divisions as they are in others, and yet you still want more? Why Zod? If I told you the earth was round, and night follows day you'd look for ways to disagree with both. Forget about boiling down, hadn't fought there for years, the point is this, some fighters aren't the same in certain weight divisions as they are in others. You seem to want to keep on disagreeing with that, despite being provided examples.

 

Of course he is better than a 45 year old Hopkins. Hopkins lost twice to Taylor and completely disgraced himself in his fights against Jones II, Winky, Calzaghe, Dawson I and Dawson II. Hopkins at this stage of his career is a b level fighter.

Losing to top level fighters does not hurt you. And this thread is about their top 5 wins not overall resume, which would be a silly thing to try and compare at this stage of Froch career.

??????????
Your arguing my point, not yours.

Class A win for Jones
Toney was not weight drained. Anyone that says that doesn't really know what they are talking about

go to 7:23
http://www.youtube.com/v/xdgo7uN7HtQ&hl

Calzaghe's win over Eubank doesn't mean much seeing as how Chris lost his last 5 fights against meaningful opponents and had to make weight at 11 days notice

He was already on the slide before he moved up, which suggests his decline was due to factors other than putting on 8 lbs

???
Taylor is a shot fighter who shouldn't even be fighting anymore. At the moment he is beating journeymen, lets see how he does when he steps up the level of competition

Putting you body in the state of severe dehydration is not healthy for you. The fact that Hatton would then suffer his worst defeat should tell you that his confidence was a bit misplaced.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...ght-fight-with-Carl-Froch-Boxing-and-MMA.html

He moved up to lhw and beat himself to become the champion

You chose a bunch of biased examples to begin with. You chose fighters who were on the slide or fighters who put there health at risk by fighting in low weight classes they had no business fighting in. When me, Popkins and Battheman talk about fighters changing weight we are talking about fighters who move up, not down.

 

Hopkins was on his best run of wins against Tarver, Wright and Pavlik when Calzaghe beat him. That was a 43 year old Hopkins Joe beat.

Yes it does, and on the other side, beating top fighters enhances your legacy.

So explain Toney having to lose 35+ pounds to make the weight against Jones? Explain him fighting at Cruiserweight not long before! Talk about agenda's Zod, yours is clear here.

Eubank showed against Thompson he still had alot left. No-one is saying that was a prime Eubank, it was a green Calzaghe.

Right, so then you agree that the SMW Jermain Taylor that Froch beat, was no the MW Taylor that beat Bernard Hopkins? Evidently, Jermain Taylor at SMW is not the fighter he was at MW :deal

That's irrelevant, he still feels more comfortable fighting back at MW :deal

Hatton felt more confident fighting at JWW, and didn't want to stay at WW. Proving that weight divisions makes a difference. If you know what's best for fighters, you should be making big money advising them, not telling me your opinions on ESB.

What does that prove? Want me to show you a quote where Roy Jones says he's feeling back to his best, feeling like he's 29 years old and at 115% prior to facing Calzaghe? Prior to facing Tarver? Evidently, just like your Hatton example, perhaps Pascal's confidence was misplaced...

You know I meant Chad Dawson.

There's no bias, the examples stand, fighters not being the same in certain weight divisions.