Carl Froch sets the record straight on who would have won if he fought Calzaghe

Wow it has taken how many posts for you to admit you got that wrong?
What you are not writing is that after the losses you mention, Jones came back to push the LHW champ in a tough points fight to Tarver before then, or that Jones took the 0 from a fringe contender, beat Tito easily who many argue as Hopkins greatest win, and after Calzaghe went the distance with the future LHW champ

Fight was at CW and not LHW. Know your facts. Jones was never KOd again at LHW.
Still as said before. Why are you going on about Jones? That was at LHW and Froch never took the risk of going to LHW at all

He would have been the biggest win of Frochs if Froch had of gone up to LHW and fought Jones, but Froch didnt go up and knowing that Calzaghes SMW resume is above Frochs and with that comment you made really elevates how much further ahead Calzaghe was

Can tell you again that Calzaghe was the P4P #1 lol.

While you are on the "tell me again". What did Froch do at LHW. I ask that because you seem to be focusing on Calzaghe fighting a fighter in the division above. So tell me what Froch did at LHW?
Do say... But we both know you wont be able to again and will end up further down against me

 

From Loudons own posts when it suits his agenda lol

Self pwnage from Loudon lol

 

this is utter babble. Small wonder everyone calls you Failey.

 

As said before I can take direct quotes but as said before, that you only take the ones that suit whereas I read all to get the full picture rather than an agenda

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/...efeat-hurts-carl-froch-broke-my-left-hand-won

In Loudons own words

See how there can be other things said by a fighter but if it doesnt suit Loudons agenda and agenda being the right word

 

Although it is not factually incorrect, look how Loudon tries to word things with his agenda. Rather than say he fought outside of Britain 4 times he says outside of Europe twice.

 

Do you think Froch would have faced Kovalev when he found a 50 year old Hopkins as a threat when there is far more than a decade between them in age?
Also Hopkins wasnt 44 when Calzaghe fought him and not a decade between them in age.
You also dont note that Calzaghe was faded and closer to the end of his career than Hopkins

Tell me. You call Hopkins shot but rate Froch for beating Pascal.

 

He was mandatory to the winner of Calzaghe/Kessler.
Do you really think Calzaghe taking the bigger fight against the bigger name to challenge for a new title at a new weight is the same as the Hatton/Witter situation who were both champs at the weight, when Froch was British level.
If you do, thats down to you but I dont think so. Its like when Froch was facing Groves. Just imagine if Froch had of taken that fight when he could have challenged the LHW champ for a new title at a new weight and against a well known legend.

 

Why do you not note that Dawson decided not to go for Calzaghe at SMW after the Lacy fight and that he decided to fight predominantly far older fighters

 

Yeah thats the comical logic.
Calzaghe goes up in weight and in his first fight takes on the top LHW.
Ward went up and faced P Smith.

That would get forgotten though

 

Joe was too quick and busy with a cast iron grill too. Calz 118-110

 

Calzaghe whips dat ass worse than large headed Andre son of headbutt.

 

Liquorice,

I was referring to his fight against Roy afterwards. Pavlik or Dawson would have been much better fights for him, both for his resume and his bank balance.

Again, I wasn't talking literally. But low risk in regards to the stylistic match up. Look at what Joe had in his favour.

Joe was fine at the weight. He could have fought at LHW whenever he'd have wanted to. It was easier for him to fight there because he was stronger as he didn't have to starve himself like he did at SMW.

Forget Kovalev, me and Odin were/are debating that.

 

The fight against Roy did poor on PPV, but Joe was so desperate to get Roy's name on his resume, he agreed to give him 50% of everything.

 

Again, I know you weren't debating Kovalev.

That was my mistake.

I was debating with Odin.

Yes, I know they were from different eras.

Yes, I do know that Joe wouldn't have fought him had they have been in the same era. Why? Because he missed the entire LHW division until his final year, where he only fought 2 guys. That's why. So if he didn't target the LHW's of his own time, as he was content to fight weaker guys at SMW instead, then it's illogical to think he'd have acted any differently if Kovalev had been on the scene. And if he only had 2 fights at the weight in his final year at 36, then again, it's illogical that one of those would have been Kovalev. And this is why Andre Ward deserves huge credit. Because he took a fight that Joe would never have taken.

Sure, you can pull apart Kovalev's resume and say that his best wins were against the likes of Bernard, Pascal and Cleverly etc. But he was a prime LHW who was a huge puncher. And he was obviously extremely dangerous to a former SMW, who wasn't a puncher, and who'd been inactive over the previous 5-6 years.

I've never laughed at Joe for fighting Bernard, and I've never made any derogatory comments about him either. And yes, Kessler was a good fighter who was a big threat. But I think Kovalev would have been a much bigger threat. And you can hit pick at anyone's resume. That obviously doesn't tell the whole story. Because I could ask you what Lacy and Kessler had done before they'd fought Joe. And the answer would be: Not a lot.

Regarding Dariusz, Joe contemplated moving up to fight him, but nothing ever came of it. But I read that the WBO would have made Joe their no.1 contender if he'd chosen to move up. And that's because he'd made numerous defences of his SMW belt.

 

Odins beard,

Yes.

He avoided Kelly Pavlik. And that kills your argument that Joe would have faced a threat like Kovalev. It just makes a mockery of the notion.

This sort of comment above, is exactly why I've questioned if you'd watched Joe's career in its entirety.

Kelly and his team wanted the fight.

Frank W wanted the fight.

Joe didn't.

Yes, I agree with you. In my honest opinion, it could have been one of Joe's easiest ever wins. It would have been a horrible stylistic match up for Kelly, especially at a C-W. But Joe wasn't interested. Because he instead wanted to fight Roy, despite saying on numerous occasions that he was was washed up and that he'd be disappointed to fight him etc.

Kelly was big news at the time. An exciting fighter who was coming off of the Taylor wins. He would have brought more recognition and a bigger pay day, again, seeing as though Joe's fight with Roy flopped on PPV, and he'd agreed to give Roy 50% of everything.

If you think that I'm deranged, you weren't there back in 2008. Joe turned down the opportunity by questioning Kelly's credentials, and then Bernard swooped in and took all the glory with his win.

So what?

Again, he had 14 more fights, and everyone's circumstances are different.

Again, Andre fought those low level guys as tune ups at the time. Tune ups before fighting Kovalev.

Again, it would depend on the circumstances.

Regarding Veit, he's very relevant to our debate. Yes, I do keep purposely mentioning him. Because it's laughable to think that Joe would have moved up and fought a guy like Kovalev, when he was more than happy to starve himself to fight a guy who he'd already beaten in a round just a few years earlier. He was content to rack up WBO defences against whoever they put in front of him. And he was doing that in his 30's. Which again, is why you have to give huge credit for Andre for taking that kind of risk.