Name for name: Carl Froch resume vs Joe Calzaghe resume

Froch has the better wins overall. I think Calzaghe would beat him but based on the better wins I hold Froch's career in higher regard.

 

he was, so? Do you hear anyone say he wasnt? then shut your fool gob.

borderline, he had to hunt for the weakest title holders in order to win.

he wsnt elite then.

 

so anyone with a zero is unbeatable?

thats your proof? your proof is shyte for brains, its been disproved many times.

find a new one immediately to save your face here please. thank you.

 

Better overall wins? Like who? Prime Kessler, Hopkins, Eubank? Didnt think so

 

Do you actually know what emulated means? This post actually implies you believe Froch was the equal of JC in terms of cowardice due to your 'hilarious' conjoining the last two syllables of Joe's surname with the word coward. It actually hints at Carl being the greater coward of the two. Not the sharpest tool in the box are you? With the emphasis on 'tool'....

 

Not a problem at all mate.

Just remember we're only ever a list of 10 victories away from debate two of the best English boxers in history.

I look forward to your eventual response.

 

Prime INJURED Kessler.

Hopkins was coming off two losse's to Taylor at Middle, and new at 175. Its a myth that Nards prime was him as a 40 something fighting at 175. You consider beating Pavlik and Pascal as cementing his standing ? lol

Prime Eubank ?

 

Injured Kessler? Yet Kessler says the hand was not an issue and Calzaghe had terribly damaged hands at that time in his career. That was faded injured Calzaghe beating prime undefeated Kessler
Hopkins had not lost as a LHW champ had beaten Tarver and Wright beforehand. You note the debateable Taylor loss but slip up when you write "You consider beating Pavlik and Pascal as cementing his standing ?" when you consider Pavlik beat Taylor who Hopkins clearly beat. Dont tell me what I consider, we are talking about your comment and Pascal lost to Hopkins when Hopkins was older so you obviously dont rate Pascal as a win for Froch then. lol

 

I don't care if he ran, he still won convincingly. It was a huge, pathetic robbery.
It's Denmark, hardly different to England. I really don't buy into that as a valid excuse whatsoever. To add to that, he's always near fight night weight anyway and the cut was very little.

 

Kessler was injured, it's very well documented.

Tarver, who did he beat after losing to Hopkins ?

Winky was another 175 novice who was virtually retired.

Pavlik was another 160lb fighter, who at the time was suffering with lots of demons outside of
the ring.

Pascal, here we go again with the same pattern. What did Pascal do with his career after losing to Hopkins ? Froch beat Pascal at 168.

I love that old Taylor, Pavlik, Hopkins triangulation. Taylor moved up to 168 and schooled Calzaghes 2nd best win in Lacy, before going into loss freefall. Pavlik hit the bottle and only had one notable fight afterwards, which was a loss to former 147lber Martinez .

NEXT..........

 

I didn't score the Hopkins fight for Joe. That ugly affair might be the best single win, but Carl's are better all around.

Bute, Pascal, Taylor, and Abraham together beat out Joe's best IMO.

 

Also well documented that Kessler said his hand wasnt a problem, even further documented that Calzaghe had chronic hand problems and also documented Kessler had eye problems when he beat Froch, but did you choose to forget all of that?

What are you talking about Tarver for? We are talking about Hopkins who Calzaghe beat.
Seems you have an agenda

Agreed. Froch beat Pascal at 168lb which is where Pascal was never a top fighter at the weight.
At LHW Pascal beat undefeated champ Dawson, who did he beat at SMW? You wont answer with anything worthwhile and because of you having such an agenda, will keep getting pwned

Yet you dont note how Lacy had a damaged shoulder from his next fight after Calzaghe or that Pavlik beat Taylor. Still you try and forget all that.
Also if you go down that line you better not forget how a faded, double vision suffering fighter coming off a loss who Calzaghe beat when prime took Frochs undefeated record[/QUOTE]

 

So you say the Hopkins win was the single best win which was for Calzaghe, so tel me who did Carl beat as good as prime undefeated Kessler also? Who did he beat as good as Eubank?
Bute was a good win but not above those and of a similar level to the Lacy win.
What did Pascal do at SMW? Who was also a fighter who lost to a fighter Calzaghe beat. Not at the level of Woodhall who Calzaghe beat. I said Woodhall but at SMW not even at the level of Mkertchyan who Calzaghe beat at SMW.
What was Taylors form when Froch fought him? 2-1 with a KO loss and never a top SMW. Not at the level of Bika at SMW.
Abraham was coming off a loss and not at the level of B Mitchell who Calzaghe beat

 

Bite > lacy any one who says otherwise is agenda driven

Who did lacy beat really before or after

Tony oakey wants his props he beat lacy better than Joe

 

Were you watching the division properly then? It wasnt as highlighted but very talented.
Before Calzaghe Lacy beat -
World rated Vanderpool
world rated Pemberton
Sheika who went on to challenge for a world title again
Williams
world rated Reid
And was beating Tsypko before the ND

After Calzaghe Lacy beat -
world rated Tsypko who had beaten Magee, Adamu, Bozic, but I believe it is in this fight where Lacy damaged his shoulder


Many fighters are never the same after a bad loss. Thats like saying who did Tyson beat after Lewis or Spinks after Tyson

Lacy was a decent SMW and has a better resume in his short career here than many of the current SMW top 10