Coming out of three 50/50 fights 3-0-0 doesn't really need that much explanation. He got lucky. He's a decent fighter, but never elite.
Froch is a tough, resilient fighter with good punching power and enormous self-belief. He lost to Dirrell though. It was a home-town decision.
:deal You need to remember that froch forced dirrell to get his track shoes on, dirrell was forced to fight the way he did by froch's actions in the ring. I think the thing with froch is you hit him and he doesn't even flinch and just keeps coming with a high workrate, when dirrell realised this he knew he had to get his track shoes on then came on strong later on in the fight to try and seal the win which he should have got. I also think dirrells style and speed can make anyone look bad and I happen to think dirrell is the best fighter in the super six. I mean it's hard to catch a guy like that who is a very fast counter puncher that uses a lot of movement around the ring the entire fight a bit like mayweather.
I think the top 5 so far is this, no idea about green because we haven't really seen him properly yet, who knows he may even beat ward. dirrell ward froch abraham kessler
Thats the best description of Froch I have ever heard. Seriously Geico and boxing should put together a co-promotion, how a common bum can when a belt these days. "So easy, Carl Froch could do it"
"Boxer/puncher" is an over-used term in my estimation. If you're going to adopt such generous standards, then pretty much everybody is a "boxer/puncher": everybody punches their opponent; everybody gets knockouts from time to time. It's only those that incorporate heavy punching into their style effectively that are boxer/punchers: I'm thinking guys like Hearns who can lay you out with either hand or shut-you out behind the jab. Straight-up fighters who get the occasional KO don't count. Taylor is just an all-round boxer imo.