Does Frochs win over Taylor beat any victory on Calzaghes resume?

The Eubank that fought calzage would have beaten the Taylor of Saturday night without question. Floyd Mayweather is not a top ten fighter on current rankings. I guess beating him wouldnt mean much now either.

As for the arm punch comments listen to it again.... the commentators say some have said it and Calzaghe has proved them wrong.

And last but not least Eubank was in traning for a fight, same as Joe was. They BOTH took the fight at 11 days notice. Clearly they were both in excellent condition and the late opponent swaps mean little if anything.

 

A definitive NO

Froch was behind on the cards, been put down, and was being outboxed and outpunched.

Also Taylor was a guy who was known for struggling in the championship rounds, but Froch did what he had to do.

Froch needs to take along look at his technique and tighten up because i cant see him going undefeated for long with the way he fought last night.

 

Collins bricked it. He knew Calzaghe would have done a number on him.

Eubanks comments after the fight sum it.... "Now I know why Collins didnt want to fight him"

 

Well we shall have to disagree to agree, no way on earth do I think Joes win over Eubank is better than Froch's triumph the other night. For a start off a faded Eubank didn't even have a proper training camp due to the short notice given...

By the way Eubank wasn't in the rankings because he was getting his arse beat, or fighting exceedingly diabolical level oponents and fighting them once in a blue moon. Not becaue he had retired (like Floyd) - he'd dropped out the ranking for a long while.

Anyway, just been looking at the news from back then, Ray Close was kicking up a fuss because he was ranked above Eubank and should have really got the fight. Don't remember that...

 

What is clear is that Kessler and Hopkins are vastly superior wins. Neither demonstrates the horrible flaws of Taylor in the ring. The guy got whooped by Pavlik, jesus.

 

To be fair I think they do, but I was just surprised that he was tagged with that even back then.

 

Plus he struggled in his victories over much smaller men in Ouma and Spinks.

Taylor is a good fighter but he isnt elite, plus he was winning the fight and Froch was struggling the whole fight.

 

Well Joe hardly looked like Mr Technique against Hopkins. You know Hopkins the guy Taylor "beat" twice.

*Cue... "no one looks good against Hopkins etc : )*

 

For a first defence of his legit WBC title Froch picked a tough nut in Taylor and travelled to the US, in the first defence of his less than stellar WBO strap Calzaghe caught the bus to Cardiff and took on the 14-1 HoF candidate Branko Sobot.....I wonder whatever happened to him

 

Even a late notice Eubank has a FAR better gas tank than Taylor.

It was a great win for Froch.......but if posters want to be ultra critical - Taylor was damaged goods, with no stamina and was moving up in weight.

 

Yup. It demonstrated quite well the gulf between Froch's heart, will and strength in comparison to his boxing ability. He has little to speak of in the latter department. One of the worst boxers around at the moment holding a world title.

I think his winning run will come to an abrupt halt shortly considering the names they are calling out. Sheer guts will not always win the day, if there is somebody nearly equally as determined in training camp and then the ring.

 

Eubank was out of the rating because he retired in 95 and had only fought a couple of bums since.

Its interesting that Collins called Eubank shot... shows a lack of class IMO. Especially when he was talking about a guy that clearly could have KO'ed in the 10th in their first fight and many thought beat him in their second.

Shot guys dont jump up 2 divisions and go 12 rounds with a champ, who later beat David Haye lest we forget ,and lose VERY narrowly once and get stopped on an injury while ahead on the second try. Had they left it more than 3 months between the figths so that Eubanks eye could have healed prperly after the first bout he most likely would have won the second.

Eubank clearly was a guy that rose to the occasion, put him in with a bum and he won but looked ordinary, put him in with a champ and he looked world class. He looked **** in many fights through his career - remember the Thornton fight or the Costa fight? You could say he was shot after either of those. But his performances after proved otherwise. Same with him after Collins and Calzaghe. He proved after that he still had a lot left, despite some people at the time thinking he was past it.

Eubank has never bitched about his loses. It seems people like to do the bitching for him sometimes though.

 

Look at it this way........

Froch beat Pascal for the vacant title whilst Calzaghe beat Eubank.
Pascal was undefeated at the time. Eubank was weight drained and had lost to Collins twice. Pascal could go on to beat WBC lightheavyweight champion Adrian Diaconu. That would increase Froch's standing greatly, if Pascal was to achieve something with his career.

Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins and beat Lacy big. However, Taylor beat Hopkins twice and beat Lacy recently. Froch Ko'ed Taylor.

I think it's unfair to criticise Froch for what he has done so far. He's paid his dues and taken risks to progress his career. His fights are highly entertaining too. They will want to see more of him in the USA after that fight.

I cannot wait for his next fight, after all he is the UK's only World Champion at the moment.

 

This is incorrect. Eubank retired after the second Collins fight and dropped out of the magazine rankings due the the fact that most of them drop a fighter when they have been inactive for at least a year. Once he came back, he fought twice at light heavy so couldn't get back into the 168 rankings.