Name for name: Carl Froch resume vs Joe Calzaghe resume

He is knowledgeable on European SMWs but rewrites history terribly to the point that he has been picked apart by some posters. Mitchell was a good win. Its probably similar to how Majr compares Frochs win over Bute to Calzaghes over Eubank if you know what I mean.
I would put Mitchell below Eubank and Kessler but after that there is an argument in my opinion whichever way it goes

 

Thanks for the reply.

Good an*lysys.

 

True. But Liles was faded, and you wouldn't put him above Eubank would you?

Surely the top 2 have to be: Kessler and Eubank.


*edit*

I've just read your previous post regarding where you'd rank Mitchell, so ignore this.

 

Mitchell was listed in the post I was responding to. 2nd in fact.

 

And lost.

 

I know mate, I meant:

Do you think he's positioned correctly on Ra's list?

He seems too high for me.

 

Yeah Froch is lucky to fight and beat standout opponents. I don't know how you think this takes away from what he did?

 

I'd probably list Calzaghe's best wins at Super Middleweight like this:

1 - Kessler - undefeated reigning WBC and WBA (Super) World Champion
2 - Lacy - undefeated IBF World Champion
3 - Eubank - former WBO Champion and Calzaghe first fight about domestic level
4 - Reid - former WBC Champion who later got robbed of the IBF and WBA (Super) titles against Ottke
5 - Mitchell - former WBA (Super) Champion fresh off a disputed loss to Ottke
6 - Woodhall - former WBC Middleweight and Super Middleweight Champion lost his title in a close fight with Beyer
7 - Brewer - former IBF Champion with two disputed losses to Ottke
8 - Bika - future WBC Champion
9 - Veit - interim WBO Champion

 

It would be productive if you were to say which bits you disagree with.

 

I said best wins not best opponents. Lacy is rated so highly on my list because of the manner of the victory and what it meant to Calzaghe - before that he was thought over-rated and protected or declining, after it he was widely recognized as one of the greatest fighters in the world.

The "pretending of Robin Reid"? What the hell does that mean. All I said was that was a former WBC Champion and he was robbed against Ottke in a fight for two titles. These are factually acurate statement - or are you going to try and defend the Ottke fight?

Mitchell lost by SD against Ottke and won one of the judges card 115-113 - some argue he was robbed, I dont go that far - but it was a close fight and Ottke victory was disputed.

Beyer controlled the first 6 rounds of the fight, but Woodhall rallied in the later rounds and almost stopped him. This was perhaps more down to Beyer's stamina failing him but it was a hard fought contest - the better fighter won but that doesn't mean Woodhall's effort should be discredited.

Brewer, again, lost by SD both times to Ottke, and people did dispute who was the worthy winner

You'll note I said Bika was a "future WBC Champion" and nothing more. I rate Bika higher than Veit because Bika troubled Calzaghe and Beyer and would go on to give a good showing against Bute and Ward - whereas Veit's claim to fame is a good win over Brewer and losing twice to Calzaghe in contest which weren't competitive.

If you want my list of Calzaghe's best opponents instead of best wins then fine.

1 - Kessler
2 - Eubank
3 - Reid
4 - Mitchell
5 - Woodhall
6 - Lacy
7 - Brewer
8 - Bika
9 - Veit

And I'm sorry, I just dont rate Veit as highly as you do.

 

This is what I mean when I say he has knowledge of the European SMW division but is terrible for rewriting history, which is why I said he gets picked apart for it. There is so much wrong with what he has written here. Veit was winning before the KD lol
Will be back later I expect but now you see what I mean with the history rewriting

 

There was nothing "fair and square" about that fight, and the fact you've even attempted to sit there and say it without a hint of irony is ridiculous. How could it be "fair" when the referee was constantly on Reid case for nothing, warning for legitimate body punches, refusing to recognize a legitimate knock down, deducting a point a headbut that never happened and- for **** sake! - at least twice warning Reid about punching Ottke in the face! It was one of the most disgraceful performances by any referee in the history of boxing.

You cant sit there and it "was fair" when the ref was totally on Ottke side and giving him every advantage.

And **** that! Ottke didn't win "9 clear round". Reid was on top for the first 7 before giving up because the Ref was screwing him out of a fair fight and the scorecards were bull**** from the start.

This fight destroyed whatever positive reputation Ottke had with the boxing public at large because it was a totally disgraceful hometown decision with one of the most openly biased referees in the history of boxing and Ottke was happy to take the gift and run away with it.

 

i meant resume as in who froch has beat, sorry should of really pointed that out

& for whats its worth i feel that would be a real 50/50 fight calzaghe was a great fighter in his day

 

but he faced them.

cowardzaghe did not face ottke, nor uninjured kessler in denmark.

He did beat his IBF rival, lacey like carl did with ibf bute, alrthough froch did it much better.

 

Froch's resume is better but Calazaghe is the better fighter. A true ATG who would be great in any era. To me Calzaghe is underrated. With that said I'm a fan of both.