Better resume Froch or Calzaghe

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by ajackman1, Jul 11, 2012.


  1. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    If Taylor moved up to LHW or CW, I could see him getting beat by Johnson, Tarver, and Calzaghe in similar fashion.
     
  2. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    I have made no factual error.

    But I will certainly dismiss the opinion that Bute is a better fighter than Kessler..when for ****'s sake one beat Froch while suffering from eye injuries and inactivity while the other got knocked out by him. Kessler was even more convincing against Andrade, not needing a rematch to set the record straight. I don't care how many idiots come out of the woodwork.

    Kessler>Bute is the most logical way to see it at this point.
     
  3. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Yeah, I haven't seen anything this preposterous on the board in some time.

    Frochsucker Land..:nut
     
  4. ashl3y72

    ashl3y72 Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    3,135
    54
    Jul 4, 2012
    fantastic, but i deal in real world results and what is going on at the moment.

    Taylor being stopped and having a tough loss against Pavlik before fighting Froch is better than Jones being brutally stopped twice and having another woeful loss prior to fighting Calzaghe
     
  5. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,029
    Sep 22, 2010
    Clearly and blatantly I was talking about the comparative victories of Froch over Bute and Zaghes over Kessler, but I can see why you are trying to turn your loss of that argument to the vast majority in the landslide poll, into a fabricated win by now making it who is better between Bute and Kessler.

    If you want to argue who is better between the two I am afriaid you first need to find someone to argue against you. You are welcome to go and do so.

    If you want to argue that Zaghes win over Kessler is better than Frochs KO of Bute then lets continue....
     
  6. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    This content is protected



    This content is protected



    I like Bute...but ****, enough's enough. Even while past his best, Kessler is better. End of the ****ing Story.
     
  7. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Frochsucker Land

    Kessler is better than Bute, but Bute is still a better win.
     
  8. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,029
    Sep 22, 2010
    Right, thanks for agreeing with the point I was arguing.

    Major lol at Frochsucker land, thats funny ****. But I'm not a frochsucker!
     
  9. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    In the real world, Jones lost to Tarver twice and Johnson. Taylor lost to Pavlik twice.

    Both men's best win at this time was Lacy. I'm not seeing a huge gap.

    But I'm not going to argue this, I agree with your notion that Calzaghe has two clearly stronger wins in Hopkins and Kessler.
     
  10. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Only in Frochsucker Land, baby.

    Where inferior fighters are the better wins. :good
     
  11. knockout artist

    knockout artist Boxing Addict banned

    6,846
    12
    Sep 24, 2011

    Age is just a number, as we've seen, Mike Tyson was in his prime at age 20, Wladimir Klitschko is in his prime at age 36. Vitali at age 41 is better than Tyson was at age 29.

    Now, if Hopkins was getting the **** kicked out of him by all top level opponents at age 43, then you'd have a point. But it's the complete opposite, he was on the best run of his career, turning in career best performances when Calzaghe beat him. The further this goes on, the more you're embarrassing yourself. As for you saying his stamina wasn't the same, if you look at his compubox numbers, he threw 640 punches against Wright, 530 punches against Pavlik and 502 against Pascal. These are all similar numbers to Hopkins in his prime, now take a look at this

    So Hopkins is making opponents miss more, and was better defensively around the time he fought Calzaghe, then he was against Trinidad. What you can see there, is Calzaghe's unbelievable stamina and output is Hopkins kryptonite, and it doesn't make a difference if Hopkins was 43, 33 or 23, Calzaghe would tire him out as he did and win a decision. Hopkins stamina was as good as it's ever been, the only difference was the pace that Calzaghe set. Also bear in mind, Calzaghe was not a young man himself when they fought.
     
  12. ashl3y72

    ashl3y72 Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    3,135
    54
    Jul 4, 2012
    And what is more worse and career damaging?

    Being KTFO twice and losing a woeful decision
    or
    being KTFO once and losing a competitive decision
     
  13. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    To be fair, Tarver/Jones III and Taylor/Pavlik II produced almost identical scores and I really don't think either performed that much better than the other.

    And apparently, they have proved to be equally damaging. Both men never went beyond beating the likes of Lacy, and lost to every live contender they've since faced.
     
  14. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    yeah but you are forgetting this is Frochsucker Land..

    Where apparently beating the better fighter doesn't equal the better win.
     
  15. ashl3y72

    ashl3y72 Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    3,135
    54
    Jul 4, 2012
    To be fair, answer the question.