Is Carl Froch amongst the top ten SMW fighters of all time?

I dunno they never really proved top 10 at the weight. Especially Toney. Toney could show up and lose any time or look untouchable.

I think there are more proven fighters of championship ability at the weight.

 

I don’t know if he is.

Watson was a fine fighter.

Those fights with Eubank were great. Obviously his career was cut short like Gerald’s.

Collins is a tough one. I think he gets overrated by many. His resume is certainly overrated for me. Because Eubank was faded and Benn was finished.

Froch clearly has a better resume for me.

In terms of ability, rating on a H2H basis, you could argue that Collins was a better fighter.

Liles had more ability than Carl, but Carl has the better resume, and he wasn’t stopped like Liles was.

 

Again, I rate guys based on resume and H2H ability.

Collins hasn’t got a particularly strong SMW resume, but he rates in most people’s top 10.

Calzaghe and Ottke have the best stats at the weight.

Was Ottke a better fighter than Toney though?

Toney had great skills and was a top 3, P4P fighter when he fought Roy.

He bashed up Iran Barkley and Tony Thornton, and he knocked out a very good fighter in Tim Littles, who’d beaten Frankie Liles. And he did it in just 3 rounds. He also knocked out a good fighter in Charles Williams. He has to feature on the list due to his ability.

Roy easily beat Toney. It’s one of the best wins, if not THE best win in the history of the division. He beat Thornton with ease. He beat Sosa with ease. He beat Malinga with ease who’d given Benn and Eubank trouble. He beat Lucas with absolute ease after playing a half of semi-pro basketball the same day. He beat world class fighters like nobody else did, whilst barely losing rounds. It doesn’t matter if he wasn’t there long. He’s head and shoulders above everyone else. He then went up to LHW and carried on beating fighters like Virgil Hill, Reggie Johnson, Montell Griffin and Antonio Tarver. And although those fights were at a different weight class, it’s extremely relevant to our debate, when you’re looking at someone’s H2H ability. Guys like Tarver, Griffin and Hill, were as good as most of those fighters that were listed at SMW. So Roy has to be on any SMW list. You cannot not include him. He has to be there on ability.

 

ok. Fair enough.
However it wouldn’t surprise me if a lacklustre Toney showed up and lost to ottke

 

Possibly. But then you could argue that Ottke wasn’t undefeated and he lost to Brewer and Reid etc.

Ranking Toney in a specific spot is hard. But he has to feature somewhere in the top 10 though.

You cannot list 10 guys who were better than him.

I think he’d be in most people’s top 5.

 

at super middle I find Toney real hard to rank il be honest

 

The lacklustre version from the Jones fight loses. A fit and motivated Toney beats Ottke

 

Resume wise Froch should be well ahead of Toney.

 

I rank on winnability.

There's just no way Liles or Watson beats Froch.

None.

 

Resume wise there's an argument he's only behind Ward imho

 

You can only rank fighters in the divisions they fought in.

Dempsey was never a CW, the same as Frazier and Louis.

 

Well thankfully Froch fought in this division.

 

Froch sails into a top ten at Super-Middleweight without any trouble at all in my opinion. He was never the top dog in the division, be it on lineage or general acclaim as being the best (muddied waters for both as is often the case), but his record is very possibly the best outside of all those who ever were.

I think it goes without saying that, chronologically, all of Jones, Calzaghe and Ward clearly outstrip him. Outside of those three, though, Froch bears comparison with anyone at 168, I'd say. I'm not saying he's definitely #4, and of course precise ratings will change depending on your own personal criteria - but regardless of which criteria you use I don't see how you could come up with another seven names to go ahead of him and push him out of a top ten. For instance, Froch was never considered genuine pound for pound material like Toney was, and Toney reached his highest pound for pound rating while he was a Super-Middleweight - but his opposition at the weight was actually a rung lower than what he'd been facing at 160, and he had fewer championship fights there than Froch. So although I'd go with Toney, I don't think it's unreasonable that someone with differing criteria might rate Froch higher purely at 168.

Similarly, guys like Park, Liles, Benn, Eubank, Ottke etc. might have strung together longer title reigns that Froch, but his level of opposition is markedly better than theirs and his record has much less filler or dubious verdicts. They might have more championship wins than Froch, but he definitely has more significant championship wins than them, and also no really disappointing losses. He was beaten by Kessler, sure, but Kessler himself would likely make a top ten in the division, and he avenged the loss in any case. Meanwhile, his loss to Ward is no disgrace as Ward, I imagine, is a lock for a top three / four spot in just about everyone's eyes.

Hard to give a precise rating, but I think I'd probably have Froch around the #5 or #6 mark. Definitely behind Jones, Calzaghe and Ward, and probably Toney too, but outside of that I'd have him ahead of all his British (or Irish) competition and certainly in front of guys like Park, Liles and Ottke.

 

Why is there no way Watson beats Froch? Froch was absolutely schooled for 11 rounds vs Taylor (who wasn't better than Watson imo) and Froch's open aggression is perfect for Watson's style. Watson has the chin to take anything Froch has for him, and the stamina to go 12 whilst out-boxing him.

I don't see why there's "noway' Watson beats Froch.

 

As tragic as Watson's situation was, he just didn't do enough for me to consider him on the kind of level required for beating Carl Froch.

A win over Benn and a close fight with Eubank doesn't compare with what Froch achieved imo.