Carl Froch ATG 3 fights time?

its irrelevant, I am talking about when he was post prime facing his
cherrypicked 40somethings.

but since you will keep asking repeat your irrelevant question even after being told its irrelevant - he was about 35. Its all on wiki, you dont need me to tell you.

If you have a problem with fighters facing older opposition as they themselves age, you should address people like Calzaghe, not me.

 

No

 

So Calzaghe was 35 when he fought Kessler? So much for fighting oldies only. You set yourself up for that one atsch

 

no you set yourself up by not reading my post.

go back and read it again instead of having a whiplaash reaction to anything that puts Calzaghe in a less than great light.

dont need an apology though, dont worry about that when you finally get it.

 

[url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13382518&postcount=29[/url]


Then you state in response to how old Calzaghe was when he faced Kessler:

[url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13382534&postcount=30[/url]

[url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=13382585&postcount=31[/url]


Your words, not mine. So much for Calzaghe fighting oldies only at a similar age to Froch, once again you set yourself up for this one. :hi:

 

He retired undefeated ain't squat. Joe is a ATG i give him that but a rather weak one. Carl Froch has already fought tougher opponents. If he wins all three i place him higher than Joe.

 

Nah. He'd be in the conversation as the best SMW of all time, but that in itself wouldn't make him an all time great. He could be considered amongst the best of his era, that's for sure.

 

Nope

Not an ATG even if he defeats those opponents

 

Kelly Pavlik is a nothing fight at this stage. Anyone in the top 15 would beat him. The Kessler rematch would be a good scalp for sure.

 

You can get them on youtube. Watch it there.

 

I saw Ward beat his arse...I saw Dirrell running for dear life and slipping to his knees trying to give Froch a blowjob every 2 minutes atsch

 

They are my words. Shame then that you arent reading them. Just to spell it the difference between my words and YOUR **** interpretation of my words -

My words - Froch is 35 NOW...HE WILL BE same age as Calzaghe fighting his oldies, I.E.36-37, WHEN WHEN WHEN WHEN HE FIGHTS ALL THESE GUYS. Understand what 'WHEN Froch is same age of Calzaghe fighting Bhop and RJJ' means? It means 36-37, not 35.

My words are NOT 'Froch will be fighting Pavlik, Kessler, Ward and the other guy at the age of 35.' These are the words of a buffoon who actually thinks it possible to fight all these guys inside 11 months. They are your clear and continued misinterpretation of my words by yourself.

The sooner you clear up your misinterpretation, the sooner you will look better to our dear readers.

 

How embarrassing for you Herol, you shot yourself in the foot, no amount of backtracking will change that :rofl

He's just turned 35, he will fight at least twice this year at the age of 35

Onto my next point, which of those guys are top young prime fighters?

Bute maybe, we'll see how he recovers. But he clearly was never that good anyway, a lot of hype similar to Jeff Lacy.

Pavlik is washed up, finished.

Kessler is clearly past his prime, inactive, has had health problems and well into his 30's, he already holds the win over an undefeated Froch.

I'd rather see Froch step up to LHW and rematch Pascal than fight Bute or Pavlik.

Also one of those oldies you refer to was the number 1 LHW in the world when Joe beat him.

The sooner you **** off and stop posting nonsense on here, the better it will be for our dear readers. You contribute nothing to these boards, a complete waste of time along with the likes of King Khan

 

Calzaghe is the guy that got me watching boxing. I was a Froch hater, but he MADE me be a fan. You can't not be a Froch fan if you like boxing at all. That said...


No. Froch has fought in one division. He has some great wins, and resume-wise, he looks better than Calzaghe. But here's the thing: Calzaghe was the man in his division. He cleaned it up, then went straight up to light-heavy and took the title there too. It took him years of fighting nobodies to get the chance to do this, but at the end of his career you have:

1. Long reign as the man at 168.
2. Wins all the titles at 168.
3. Moves up and takes the title at 175 (from a consensus top 3 P4p fighter)
4. Was considered top 3 p4p for a long time, and retired on top.

I wish Calzaghe had taken on Pavlik before moving up, and I wish he had defended the title at 175 against some young fighters. But he was an old speed fighter with bad hands who had been made to wait too long before cracking the bigtime. I personally think he wasn't willing to risk losing his undefeated record because he knew he didn't have much left.

With Froch, so far you have:
1. Is a top contender at 168 who takes on everybody but isn't quite the best.

That's all. He's great to watch, he'll fight anyone, he knows his boxing, but there's no getting around the fact that he's second-best in his division. What I think we'll see from Froch is a few more great action fights like the ones mentioned, then a move to 175 where there's great fights like Pascal, Cleverly, and a Ward rematch (Ward will have the 175 title by then).

I think Ward is the one thing keeping Froch from eclipsing Calzaghe. Froch can beat anyone but Ward, and that's going to keep him from ever being the man at 168 or 175.

And then there's the fact that head-to-head, Calzaghe would dominate Froch.

BUT: If Froch can beat Ward at 168 or take the title at 175, he will have out-achieved Calzaghe in my mind and there will be no debating that. I don't think Froch will beat Ward, but he has a history of proving me wrong and I'll love watching him attempt it.

Summary: Froch needs to win a lineal championship at 168 or 175, but not necessarily both, since his overall body of work is higher quality than Calzaghe's. Calzaghe has achieved more at this point.