Froch vs Calzaghe @ 168 who wins?

whatever froch go's on to achieve, lets not fool ourselfs into thinking he would have beaten calzaghe. joe would have slapped him silly.

 

This, definitely.

 

:huh Since when did Calzaghe become remotely difficult to hit???

I think that if Sakio Bika can take Calzaghe into the 117-109/116-111 range on the cards, then Froch will be more than capable of exceeding that.

Froch's jab, aggression, drive and power will trouble Calzaghe.

I'll back Calzaghe's speed to see him take a decision 116-112 or something like that, but to imply it would be another Calzaghe-Lacy is silly.

 

Froch by SD.

 

read my previous posts you idiot. A TKO like what Froch did to Taylor was a whupping

you clearly havent been reading the thread properly atsch

 

Close enough <= :yep

 

What Hopkins actually said is that he fought Calzaghe using the wrong strategy, and in the rematch he would fight using a offensive versus defensive posture. Next fight, he showed us what he meant against Kelly Pavlik. :yep

 

Froch UD.

 

Calzaghe, of course.

 

wot ee sed

 

Calzaghe UD unfortunately.

 

This fight would look more like Calzaghe-Reid than it would Calzaghe-Lacy.

 

At last someones chatting some sense in this thread

 

Yeah of course noone knew who Froch was, especially after his win over Pascal broadcast on ITV. Muppet.

 

I don't think he is as dumb as he looks. A cave man like Froch doesn't get as far as he has being stupid. I think he would be dangerous for twelve rounds with Calzaghe given Slappys lack of fundamentals, poor defense, and the fact that Calzaghe was largely unproven against fighters of Froch's pedigree. This is fundamentally an academic question considering Calzaghe is retired and would have dodged Froch for how ever long it took to avoid ever fighting him.