Froch vs Calzaghe record

Froch has stronger depth, but I think Calzaghe has the single 2 best wins over Hopkins and that Kessler, which makes it a little tricky.

I probably like Froch's better now for that depth, but there is little doubt any head to head is a complete mismatch. Froch wouldn't be able to deal with Calzaghe's speed, his footwork, his ability on the inside, and while he punches he isn't a one punch kinda guy, or the kinda guy that throws the sneaky right hand counters Calzaghe was prone too.

 

Calzaghe would almost unquestionably be undefeated against frochs resume (maybe ward is debatable), froch would lost to the kessler calzaghe fought and Hopkins

 

How does Froch have the better resume?
Its a very good resume that Froch has but overall it is not there yet.
The division wasnt as well advertised a few years back, but now America has a world champ in the division there is an interest. If Calzaghe had of beaten Dirrell years ago, it would have been no different to how people think of Veit, even though when Calzaghe fought Veit a second time, Veit had a far better resume and was an interim world champ. Pascal would have been a little known, not done much at SMW fighter and not considered at the level of Eubank. Abraham had not done anything at SMW and was coming off a loss and would likely have been called another mismatch if Calzaghe had of fought him. Johnson lost an eliminator to Sheika when it came to facing Calzaghe.

This content is protected

Can someone explain how Pascal, Dirrell, Taylor, Johnson, Mack are good SMW wins? They havent done anything at the weight. Nothing.
Abraham isnt a top SMW either. I thought he lost the first fight to Steiglitz and then did lose the return and how many posts were on ESB saying Steiglitz was the worst champ etc. Many on here even said Bute was a fighter that never did anything and never stepped up and not a top champ. I actually think Frochs win over Bute was excellent, but just look at how people have changed their posting to suit.


Carl Froch............VS.............Joe Calzaghe

Bute.....................................Kessler --- Both undefeated world champs

This content is protected

(Kessler beat Froch)

Kessler of now........................Eubank

This content is protected

Abraham.................................Lacy (Lacy a proven SMW and winner of 5 SMW title fights. Abraham no pedigree at all at SMW was coming off a loss)

This content is protected

Dirrell....................................Mitchell (Mitchell a 2 time SMW champ who had never been clearly beaten, only lost by debateable SD in Germany to Ottke, had KOd long time SMW champ Liles, beaten a future SMW champ twice, compared to Dirrell who had done nothing at SMW)

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

.......................................Veit 2 (Veit an interim SMW world champ) Taylor had not done anything at SMW and was 1-2 coming in, in his last 3 fights

This content is protected

Mack........................................Mkertchyan
Mack had not done anything at SMW whilst Mykertchyan won a European SMW title

This content is protected

Johnson...................................Sheika --- Sheika was coming in with a win over prime Johnson, Froch beat faded, boiled down Johnson,

This content is protected

Magee......................................Reid --- Calzaghe beat prime Reid (who was a SMW champ), and faded Reid beat prime Magee.

This content is protected

With that above, you can still note Brewer who was a SMW champ, Bika who is still a top 10 SMW, which shows that the era is not as strong as it used to be, Veit 1 who became a SMW champ, Manfredo when a top 10 SMW, Starie who beat undefeated Woods. Then you have the LHW wins over Hopkins and Jones

A big thing is that many here do not know the division from a few years back before Lacy. People watch the SMW division because of what Calzaghe did and the S6 was to find a champ after he left the division.

Im a big Froch fan and he is one of my favourite fighters, but I have watched the division from day one and his SMW resume although good isnt up there with Calzaghe, Eubank, Ottke, Kesslers yet

 

You posted all that drivel and in the middle of it say that beating Mario Veit in a rematch was a better accomplishment than beating Jermain Taylor.

Taking six rounds to beat a guy you've previously stopped inside a round is meaningless, as opposed to travelling abroad to face a former undisputed champion, albeit from the division below, in your first defence of your title.

On the one hand you're putting into context the fact that certain opponents had done little or did little afterwards, but you're doing it entirely in favour of your own agenda.

You conveniently forget that Lacy nearly lost to Manfredo in perhaps the most awful fight ever held at the MGM Grand, and was dominated by Taylor too in a title eliminator at 168.

Some of those you've clearly got the wrong way round - Dirrell is a better win than Mitchell, and Johnson better than Sheika.

The rest I'd probably go along with, but with different reasoning.

 

Calzaghe and Froch are both fighters the UK can be proud of.

 

Calzaghe, clearly. Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Kessler, Lacy, Bika, Hopkins are all top quality wins. Carl's not really got anything like Hopkins on his record, and he lost to a fresher version of Kessler when it counted most.

 

Wow that's heavily biased towards joe
I believe his wins over brewer,Mitchell,Sheika,Reid and woodhall are underrated but his resume is nowhere near as demanding as frochs

 

And as for people watching the supermiddleweight division because of Calzaghe that disregards the millions who followed benn eubank Watson Collins etcAnd Kessler and ottkes records aren't as tough as froch either


Listen mate you say you like froch but it seems to me you have made your mind up his resume is overrated and you don't give a balanced argument so people won't consider any reasoning you have given
You can pull apart or improve anybody's resume easily

 

Well said!! People don't seem to get it to obsessed with what is happening right now. There is no comparison between Froch and Calzaghe.

Don't forget the Froch was losing to Taylor up until the Knockout so very lucky not to have another loss.. Froch deserves a lot of credit for getting where he has on limited skills and hats off to him but his record is not as good a Calzaghe. Joe is on of our greatest ever boxers if not the best. Froch would struggle to be in the top ten

 

Also, Bailey's posts are spot on here. Dirrell is an inconsequential win and, in fact, Carl lost that fight. So hardly setting up a great argument there. Froch has a shiny record, but it's populated by a blown up MW who battered the **** out of him for eight rounds, another blown up MW who lost pretty much every fight at 168, and well past-it Johnson who ran him close.

Froch has got three signature wins: Pascal, Bute and now the Kessler rematch. Pascal and Bute, much as I like both of them, are no better than the guys Calzaghe was beating. The only difference is that they're contemporary and people are more familar with them than the euro guys Joe was facing.

Joe's record is better than Froch's.

 

Calzaghes record is underrated,the general publics consensus that he fought the standard of opposition that cleverly has fought is rubbish

Brewer is a very underrated win that was a war
Mitchell and Sheika at that time were dangerous opponents
Eubank,Reid and woodhall were all genuine British world level fights and were taxing fights when joe wasn't at his best
Lacey,Kessler,Hopkins and jones jnr are top class wins no matter what the circumstances

Froch has lost and had tight tough wins(Taylor dirrell) but so what doesn't that show how good he is.name me a fighter who hasn't been pushed,one of calzaghes minus points is he was never extended fully apart from a couple of knock downs and poor performances due to injuries he has never had to face the kind of adversity in fight and after defeat that Carl has
Frochs run of fights is impressive whether the opponents have campaigned heavily at that weight or not
Bute Kessler pascal Taylor were all top class wins,how he beat Taylor makes it better In my opinion
Abraham and dirrell were good wins.forget the points with dirrell history says he won against a talented opponent.abraham showed his skills against a previously formidable opponent,very similar to Lacey
Johnson and mack were fights he was expected to win.against Johnson it was clear he knew he wouldn't hurt him so played for a points win
Also Carl can take pride from his losses to the excellent ward and Kessler 1,he went away In both and was competitive.coming back from the defeats better is impressive

For me they both have had varied and tough careers for differing reasons
Calzaghe beat the better opponents
Froch has had more regular high profile opponents win or lose

A score draw

 

Interesting compilation from Jeff Powell:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2331312/Carl-Froch-beats-Mikkel-Kessler-Jeff-Powells-best-British-boxers.html

 

that lists a joke

where the hell did nigel benn come from ??
Hey I loved the guy as a boxer but calz and froch are ahead of him

and calz is ahead of froch in terms of greatness

powell just trying to stir **** to get people to view his article

 

My British top ten would be!!

1) Joe Calzaghe
2) Ricky Hatton
3) Lennox Lewis(not exactly British)
4) Naseem Hamed
5) Ken Buchanan
6) Chris Eubank
7) Nigel Benn
8) Scott Harrison
9) Carl Froch
10) Ricky Burns

I'm only 30 so this is more my generation with the addition of Ken Buchanan. Probably with a bit more research I would have a few of the older guys around there