Better resume Froch or Calzaghe???

I really like Joe and have all the respect in the world for what he achieved but for me Froch's resume is clearly superior already.

Calzaghes best win is better than anything Froch has so far acheived (Kessler) but this aside his best wins are Hopkins and Lacy both of which are decent to be fair.

However for me its Frochs' willingness to travel that tips this argument, wins over Taylor and Arthur away and a very narrow loss to Kessler coming after war with Pascal and tough fight with Dirrell show me a respect for the sport and a fight the best attitude.

 

I'll ignore this because it does not suit my argument.

 

:good

 

Calzaghe has the better names, but some would call it smoke and mirrors.

 

Froch has fought a lot of good fighters on the trot but Calzaghe's resume is better atm.

Calzaghe made 20 defences of his title, won every belt, and was undefeated, not to mention 2 weight lineal champion.

He beat a faded Eubank when he was very green himself. Beat brewer, Reid, lacy, Hopkins, Mitchell, woodball, a shot jones jr. Prime Kessler, a tough bika. He beat a few very good fighters, quite a few good fighters.

Froch, whilst on an awesome run of fights, is having to do it because he had done nothing on the world stage until late in his career. He beat Pascal, beat Taylor but was being outboxed by a guy who was a career middleweight and his best days were behind him who had been beaten before and brutally ko'd in his next fight. Beat dirrell but
many thought he lost. Lost to Kessler and while it was a close and competitive fight he lost clearly IMO. Beat a limited career middleweight in Abraham who had been exposed in his previous fight.

Sound like a froch hater but I'm just trying to show people his last 5 fights haven't been that great and don't convince me he has a better resume than calzaghe, if he had won them all and clearly there may be a case.

 

I do think Calzaghe is massively overrated but the Kessler he beat was better than the Kessler who beat Froch. Even though the Hopkins fight could have gone either way, beating him is a terrific achievement as he is still amongst the top end of a lot of peoples p4p lists 2 1/2 years later despite his age.

Froch is on a great run of tough fights, if he beats Johnson, beats Ward then wins a rematch against Kessler Id say he overtakes.

 

"You're trying to pull the patronising card because you're being a berk" haha your some muppet, any turkey would know that was sarcasm if they seen the fight, why would I say that - backing up you point

There's something up with Pavlik, he's dirt - that's why I said originally "don't say Pavlik", Bhop much more settled at weight

Correct - don't really dig JC, never pushed himself - stayed at home & never fought prime opposition (kessler excluded - at home for a change)

I know what it means - doesn't make you any less of a nerd

 

that was the sound of being owned. Thanks for participating, kiddo.

 

oh - I feel so "owned", you got me there lad, you ruined me - I'll never post again....... see ya

 

applying the calzaghe "hater" logic to froch's resume:

pascal was green & massively over-rated.
taylor was shot and not that good in the first place.
dirrel is a never was.
kessler is shot & half blind & still beat froch
abraham is a hypejob and a blown up middleweight and also possibly shot.

not saying that's what i think...but people talk some ridiculous **** about calzaghe.

 

A key factor will be what Froch's opponents do in the future. A lot of Joe's wins were impressive at the time but they don't hold up as well 10 years down the line. Froch's resume could look a lot weaker in 3 years or so if his best wins fail to deliver.

Having said this, you also need to look at what the opponents had achieved when Froch beat them. For example, Pascal was very inexperienced and a achieved nothing when Froch beat him. Now he is much more experienced and fighting at different weight so Froch should not milk his success too much.

 

In a nutshell ..spot on :good .. Im a fan of both but Frochs CV deffo better and willingness to fight away from home ...

 

true boxing fans know that isnt the case its like saying Taylor Beat Hopkins twice and Froch KO taylor etc, all ifs and buts. in all honesty, i think Froch has the better resume.