Prime Vs Prime I think few would beat Joe Calzaghe. Prime RJJ and Bernard Hopkins yes, but Carl Froch no. IMHO, of course.
Reid on his best day beats a SMW Abraham, Eubank beats SMW Taylor, Sheika beats Johnson (so does pre Calzaghe Lacy actually imo.. Johnsons run at SMW is pish.. in fact he was soundly defeated by Vanderpool who Lacy sparked in 8..) Bika & Brewer make floppy actor Direll cry & feign injury, Woodhall bends Groves over, Mitchell chin checks chinny Bute (he had a history of banging up southpaws.. Joe and Liles etc) & the Kessler Joe soundly beat whoops all of Carls opposition (barring billy goat Ward) & Carl himself.. Calzaghe >Froch
Yeah have to agree mostly with you on this. Abraham was a very good Middle not so much at Super. Taylor was a very good Middle but once cracked by Pavlik was never quite the same and patchy after that. Johnson was really from the previous era and generally a tough dude but had clocked many losses by the time Froch fought him. The Dirrell's had some attrubutes but were weak mentally and never amounted to much and Groves really should have beaten Froch the first time and was clocked fairly in the second fight. I like Groves but he just wasn't elite. As I've said Bute avoided the prime guys and was feasting on the previous generation before fighting Froch. but his fight with Andrade showed his frailty in the chin department and required the ref to save him. Prime Kessler beats all but Ward but I think would have done far better on neutral ground that would have nipped the constent foeling in the bud and made it a far more even fight.
No offence taken and not wanting to cause any either Which would fall short in that it was a long time after that even when Reid beat undefeated Magee We could apply that to several scenarios. Froch fought Kessler coming off a loss, Abraham coming off a loss, Johnson when he was 2-2 in his last 4 fights for example This is the part I dont get! Based on what? His biggest win was faded last fight of career Kessler. He didnt face any SMW as good as prime Kessler or Eubank when Calzaghe fought him. I dont know if Bute would have been as good a win as Lacy, Mitchell etc. He hadnt beaten anyone as good as say Liles for Mitchell or Reid for Lacy Wasnt Froch going to move up and face Pascal at LHW in a rematch? Why is it Calzaghe should have moved up and not Froch? With a greater resume also
Kessler beats Pascal. Eubank beats Taylor. Mitchell chin checks Bute. Roided Reid beats Abraham. Left hook Lacy>SMW Johnson. The froch fought much better opposition argument is overblown. Johnson was getting whooped at super middleweight over a decade earlier & two of Carl's best wins were career middleweights. Froch is a great fighter and went on a tear no doubt, fought them on the road and his resume is more condensed but the idea that his competition is vastly superior is a nonsense. Plus he lost twice as well.
Reid was crap against Magee lets be real, he scored 3 knockdowns well i would question one of the knockdowns. But outside of those 3 flash knockdowns, it was one of the worst fights in history. And arguably Magee deserved to win despite the 3 flash knockdowns, because Reid fought such an abysmal fight. You say Johnson was 2-2 but he'd had impressive performances stopping Mack, Green, and his loss to Chad Dawson. Who was the best Light Heavyweight in the world at that time, and was also a top 10 P4P fighter. Was a very competitive fight in which some felt Johnson won, that's not quite in the same league as Reid fighting an abysmal non effort vs a shopworn 42 year old Sugar Boy Maligna is it ? And as for your other comments yes you can apply that, just like you can apply that to Calzaghe's resume. Brewer = Coming off a loss to Antwun Echols Eubank = Coming off two losses to Collins, was originally scheduled to fight at Light Heavyweight, and took the Calzaghe fight on short notice. Mitchell = Coming off a loss to Ottke That's three more examples along with the examples of Reid and Woodhall i mentioned earlier, as i said you can pick apart anyone's resume. But sometimes you have to look at the context of some of these losses aswell, like Mitchell vs Ottke for example was a controversial one. And the reason Calzaghe should of moved up, is because he had big fights he could of made vs Tarver, Jones, Michalczweski, etc. Instead of fighting the likes of Pudwill, Thornberry, Starie, McInctyre, Jimenez, Mkrtchyan, Salem, Ashira, Manfredo, a pretty awful list of opponents. Compare that to Carl Froch who one after another fought Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler, Abraham, Johnson, Ward, Bute, Mack, Kessler 2, Groves x2. Thats all in a row without any gimme inbetween all of these fights are tough. And the reason Carl Froch didn't move up is because he didn't have to, just look at the list of opponents above. There was also the Super Six Tournament so the division was booming, Calzaghe could of moved up and had big fights instead of fighting some of the awful opponents he was fighting, yes he did move up eventually and beat Hopkins which was good win, and beating a badly faded Jones which wasn't a good win. But i feel like he could of done it sooner, and wasted quite a bit of his career at Super Middleweight fighting against rubbish opposition. Lastly you make good points but i don't agree with necessarily all your points, your not going to convince me that Froch didn't take more risks than Calzaghe. It took Calzaghe until his last two fights and 15 years into his career until he travelled. and one of those fights was against a completely shot Roy Jones, when instead he could of fought the undefeated Kelly Pavlik. I remember that fight being talked about, correct me if i'm wrong my memory might be hazy on the matter and my timeline maybe mixed up. I just feel like despite Calzaghe having a very good career, it could of been a more memorable one. Had he been willing to travel earlier and moved up to Light Heavyweight sooner. That's the last thing i'm gonna say on the matter, i said yesterday i wasn't going to debate their opposition. And i don't really want to get involved in a long back and forth about it, as i said no offence to you i just don't really want a long debate about it, i know that sounds like a cop out. But if you reply i'll let you have the last say on the matter have a good day.
Calzaghe by a 116-112 / 117-111 type decision. Calzaghe's superior hand speed & elite combo punching would be hard to guard against, for a boxer like Froch with limited defensive abilities, especially on the inside. Froch was a cooler fighter though, more guts, grit & willingness to fight everyone anywhere.
I’d definitely have picked Joe on a decision. The only thing which could potentially have tripped him up, was if he’d not been disciplined, and he’d have engaged Carl in a shootout.
Great matchup- Joe wins a wide decision. I'm sure Froch has his moments but Calzaghe was the total package minus the power.... He obviously had the hands to keep you honest. He lands the cleaner punches more consistently. Calzaghe W12 Froch
Calzaghe has the durability and fitness to win the championship rounds that are usually frochs! Zaggers close UD
Calzaghe on points, and very wide. Froch was a strong boxer with good chin, but he's too slow for Calzaghe. Also Joe had good power in his early fights until his hands got brittle. Everyone called him a slapper but early in his career he used to hit hard as well.
