Does Froch now have a better record than Calzaghe?

'One of UK's finest ever', is a fairer comment.

Greatness is for a special few, and is an insult to the word and Froch if used in context of Carl, at the moment.

 

Hopkins was in the middle of a fantastic run when Calzaghe beat him in Vegas:- Tarver win, Winky Wright win, Calzaghe loss, Pavlik win, Ornelas win, Roy Jones win, Pascal draw, Pascal win.

Kessler was a prime and an undefeated champion when Calzaghe beat him, a worse version of Kessler coming off a loss then beat Froch 3 years later.

Calzaghe beat a prime undefeated Lacy, which is going to be very similar to Froch win over Bute.

Calzaghe would not only beat Froch h2h, but Calzaghe still has a much better record.

 

Carl Froch fighting in Europe on a Sauerland card and getting a UD> Anything Calzaghe ever did.

 

I don't think Froch has beaten anyone Joe wouldn't have.

Hard to beat a guy with a 100% record but Frochs career isn't over. Joe was 35 when he fought Kessler so still time for Froch to keep adding to his record.

 

Nard.

 

Let's not forget that Joe wouldn't have fought a lot of the people Froch has.

 

You are an idiot.

 

As you say Kessler is the obvious one. B-Hop would have been a tough frustrating opponent for Froch to try and beat.
I think Joe's angles and output would have caused Ward problems. Froch didn't fight for a world title until he was 31. Joe had already defended his belt 12 times at the same age and the majority were not world title novices.

 

Calzaghe was mentally strong, he only knew how to win.
Steve Collins retired rather than fight Calzaghe, Roy Jones was told by Eubank back in the day that the risk of fighting Calzaghe was too great, Hopkins team agreed to fight Calzaghe back in the day for 3 million, the word is they found out how good he was and asked for 6 million the next day so the fight didnt happen, Calzaghe was ducked by the top boys because it was known in the game how good he was.

 

Indeed. Roy was shot to pieces, Joe gets absolutely zero credit for beating that version of Roy Jones. It's well down the list of his best wins and going 12 rounds with that version of Roy is arguably more a negative than a positive.

 

Joe on fighting Roy Jones:

“I know my capabilities and unless I got paid the crown jewels I wouldn’t want to risk it.”

 

Androstenedione.

 

Agreed. Yet idiots like trampie try and put it down as an ATG win.

It's not like Joe beat the RJJ of the 90's, for crying out loud.

If you're defending Joe's wins in a 45 year old Hopkins (or however old he is) and a RJJ that wasn't tanked in ANY top 10, and was shot to pieces, then you need your head looking at.

 

Okay pin dick. Who has fought better opposition and on a more consistent basis than Froch? Who? Tell us?

 

Funny how Joe traveled so late in his career, isn't it? Like "Two fights til i retire" late!