Name for name: Carl Froch resume vs Joe Calzaghe resume

I suggest you go back and look at your initial attempt at being clever.

 

no, you are bringin up hopkins, againg and again.

I have no interest in him, we are debating cowardzaghe.

continue in that vein or continue to fail.

 

I give Joe an awful lot of credit for getting back up after he'd been knocked down. But we don't know how he'd have fared if he'd have lost, especially via knockout. Personally, I think a defeat would have destroyed him mentally. Which is why he never really put himself in a situation where he was at real risk. If Roy had beaten him in 2008, that would have been really bad for Joe's rep. Because nobody could have said Roy was back at 40, coming off of lacklustre wins and back to back knockout defeats, 4 years earlier.

 

Very different circumstances though.

 

In what respect?

 

In the respect that the best U.S./U.S. based fighters don't have to travel in the same manner that a guy like Joe did. They have the luxury of having everything they need in their home country. They have the biggest TV networks, the world's most powerful promoters, and the majority of the world's best fighters as well as their main competition are based there. That's just the way it is.

Joe needed to go to the U.S. earlier than he did to try and obtain the biggest available fights, just like Naz, Bruno, Benn and Hatton etc, all did before him. He was too good to be killing himself to make weight to defend his lightly regarded WBO belt 21 times. He should have been in the LHW mix in the early 00's.

 

Both of your posts are good reads Loudon and like Orca's have made me question whether I'm giving Roy too much credit??? your point about the mis timed shot is a good observation and reflection of Roy's state. The mindset would have been the strongest factor for sure in these scenarios.

Who's game plan and mental attitude would have trumped? Bute and Groves were riding high before Froch beat them and would have been supremely confident!....but were they actually experienced enough at that time to take out even this version of Roy? were they capable of executing a tough game plan like that? would the fact that Roy was the naturally bigger and more talented guy be a deciding factor? were both deep down ever reeeeaaaaally capable of winning a decision against a top guy??? Bute and the others mentioned haven't impressed me enough to say they could however credit to George he showed serious heart in the first Froch fight but I don't believe this was his game plan from the get go as he just couldn't adapt when the pressure got too high.

Even though Roy was past it, as a veteran HOF he should have enough ring savvy to try and switch things up and force an opponent of that calibre to adapt out of their comfort zone. even if only for the first portion of the fight there is still a chance this might be enough against fighters of that calibre to dictate them in to defensive mode where Roy could set the pace. At face value asking any version of Groves or Bute to come up to LHW and take out an all time great like Roy is still a challenge and from where I'm sitting still has a question mark over its head as to whether they could do it?

However your points have made me consider whether I might be clutching thinking Roy still was one of the "top guys" at that time at LHW and was actually capable of the things im quoting??? I suppose we'll never know but this has made me want to watch the fight again as well as the one against Trinidad as I'm second guessing.

Peace Loudon

 

I agree to an extent but there was only 2 money fights at 175 at the time, one W's RJJ who obviously W's the name fighter and in the US, the other was Michalczweski who obviously was fighting game out of Germany.

The thing is imo JC's career is very underrated, at 168 he cleaned house and at the time 168 was stronger than 175 and apart from the two fighters mentioned .

Towards the end of his career obviously RJJ had been beaten and we had Tarver who whilst an excellent boxer was inconsistent and remember after Hopkins beat him Hopkins defended against a blown up light middleweight in Winky, then lost to JC.

Calzaghe was 36 when he beat BH and RJJ and if he'd had moved up earlier he wouldn't of had the big unification fights with Lacy and Kessler.

 

Back to the topic of named opponent vs named opponent for Calzaghe vs Froch, there is no doubt that Froch's resume is beyond comparison to Calzaghe's.
Plain and simple fact is, Froch, although he didn't always win, conclusively faced the better opposition, and he faced them in their primes or very close to it.
Award: Carl "The Cobra" Froch!

 

Not even sure what you are really going on about here but if people call Froch, Wards best SMW win, Kessler had already done that when faded. Dont think there is much you can argue about that and you have ducked my previous comments and questions

 

You keep saying the word duck and I use it when you duck my questions but cant recall saying that about a boxer

 

Best place for Herol is on ignore. there can be many posters who you can disagree with but when they dont post anything at all relevant and dont know the subject they are trying to debate, its best not to bother with them. I would correct his mistakes and he would make them again in the very next post.
Hes on ignore now

 

Loudon. To many posts for me to bother catching up on. Start again with one smaller post or bullet points.
Thanks

 

degale will surely be the next one to outstrip joe, his early run exceeds joes early run easily.

joe keeps dropping down the brit smw rankings with each year.

 

Come again?
Calzaghe only had around half of his title fights in Wales