Name for name: Carl Froch resume vs Joe Calzaghe resume

YO stupid. Ali was better than Berbick , but Berbick was a better win than an 1980 Muhammed Ali.

Beating prime undefeated Bute in a massive upset is a better win than a washed up Eubank 6 years out of his prime.

 

It has taken a while but some are understanding that now. MAJR who feels Bute was the better win for Carl over Calzaghes win for Eubank feels that version of Eubank would have beaten that version of Bute
He wrote

Which shows how some people are more taken in by hype than fact even when addressing a fact

 

Bute is a better win and its not even up for debate. He was on a run of impressive knockouts over top rated super middles weights.

Eubank was such a non issue his fights weren't even on TV prior to fighting Joe.

 

This is true

 

I have tended to not give you too much attention over recent times because as you are aware, I have made you look stupid with how you have got your facts wrong and how you have not honoured bets etc, but you at least try which is why you are not on ignore.
Lets have alook and see whats gone wrong here

Point 1
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

Point 2
List how many past and active SMWs you think have a better SMW resume! Im sure you will get that wrong but I dont think there are any besides Calzaghe. Also if it wasnt a good win then you forget that several publications picked for Eubank.

Point 3
Obviously I can see the trolling in here but Eubank had beaten world rated Wharton in 94 which completely shows how you have got it all wrong again.
To top it all off you make a real foolish comment when you compare Calzaghe beating Eubank to Froch beating Mack. Though I do find you amusing even if daft

 

Bute didnt win his fight before Froch by KO so that is another wrong comment.
Now tell me this impressive run of top SMWs

Watch Dino duck this question

 

Consider Bute lost a very narrow decision to DeGale in a fight many thought he won. Consider Bute then got a draw against the current best SMW in the world.
If Eubank gets points for fights he lost then so does Bute and Bute scores more than Eubank whose losing efforts were years and years before he fought Joe.
Bute was on top level. He still operates on top level. Eubank was not. Bute went on to win fights. Eubank never won a fight ever again. Bute has many more years to bridge the gap even further.
Bute was the IBF Champion. Eubank was unranked.
Bute wins this duel by a land slide.

 

Notice how Dino ducked certain parts of this post and cut it down. Thats the ducking I was referring to.
M Spinks didnt win a fight again after Tyson. It depends what level you mix in. Now you are comparing losing to a SMW having his first defence who had not beaten anyone of real note to losing to a massive CW who went on to beat D Haye who some argue as the best CW ever. lol lol lol. Dino you fall flat every time

 

See the duck!

 

to prove calzaghe fought as a top level smw - nothings changed since last post either.

why u asking again when you just been told? nevermind dont waste your breath explaining that, just tell us how eubank was a top level smw at that time.

YES, we ALL know this. Why write something like this.
You are just avoiding the point again - that he was CURRENTLY a top level smw.

Alis not considered on the level of a ATG HW if he fights someone in 1985 or 1995 or 2015 is he? OBVIOUSLY NOT. YOU MUST know simple shyte like this, u r not an idiot. why u trying to advertise yourself as one by arguing against it.

 

Eubank's last loss prior to Calzaghe was 2 years.

Bute's loss to Pascal came 2 years after the Froch loss.

But remember for a guy who was allegedly shot Eubank stepped up to challenge Thompson and losing a debatable fight for the WBO cruiserweight title 6 months after he got dominated by JC superstar.

 

I see where your coming from and your argument is more then sound but we may have to agree to disagree on this one. The way I see it is a past it LHW Roy is still more dangerous then the SMW versions of Abraham, Mack, Taylor and Groves.

Regarding Bute in particular I think you're 100% correct that Roy didn't have the same intensity at that stage so he wouldn't have been able to topple Bute the same way Carl did.....however the reason I still say this version of Roy beats that version of Bute comes down to adaptability. Bute was more of a cautiously smart fighter who wasn't a particularly viscous attacker himself but when the things got sticky Bute tends to stay stuck which showed heavily in loses to Froch and Pascal. The then versions of Abraham, Mack, Taylor, Groves and Bute that Carl toppled all share the same flaw which is their inability to turn things around and adapt. However this version of Roy was still able to time and catch and drop a more skilled and committed fighter in Calzaghe early!!! I h2h believe that Roy would out time and catch Bute early in a similar way and send him in to defensive mode where even an old Roy could control the tempo for most of the rnds. cant see a KO but MD/UD still in favour of a past it Roy. I really don't rate Bute, I think he's shown his true colours under pressure, this may be down to his level of experience at that time and that he wasn't ready for an all or nothing version of Froch which could have unfortunately ruined him?? but to me he still doesn't have enough for the win.

 

really??? I give that version of Roy at LHW more credit then a win over Mack but each to their own!

 

Sorry but that statement is rubbish. Roy was shot at that point. He was not world class. Groves would have handled him with ease and I'd pick Taylor to beat him and Abraham to ko him at some point. Now, neither of those guys would have handled him as easy as Joe but then Joe was a better fighter than those guys. The win over Jones means nothing for JC. It was an embarrassing end to a very good career. Anyone that actually picked Jones to beat him need their heads examined.

 

Danny fhooking green ko1 1 year after Joe goes life and death with the shell of Roy
That's what you do to a shot fighter hell look wheat enzo did go on say years later
Joe already told the world it ain't no secret Roy as been shot for over a decade