Froch Vs Calzaghe (greatness and h2h)

Just watching his whole career in comparison. I'm not really into the ABC theories but over the course if their respective careers I think Joe proved himself the better fighter.

 

I don't really like debating resume as it's boring, I prefer watching fights.

But in terms of wins I think are noteworthy.

Froch: Kessler, Groves, Pascal, Bute, Abraham, Taylor. Then close fights with Dirrell and Johnson plus a loss to Kessler and a loss to Ward.

Calzaghe: Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy, Mitchell, Eubank, Bika. Then a close fight with Reid.

For me Hopkins is far and away the best opponent of the two and I think he'd have beaten Froch as well. Calzaghe beat Kessler very clearly where as Froch had two razor close fights with him so there's another edge there.

Groves, Taylor, Pascal, Bute are on the level of the Lacy and Mitchell wins imo but obvs Froch has more so he gets the edge there.

Abraham is about comparable with Eubank.

Then the next level of fighters Froch doesn't have the depth to compare. Joe has Bika plus all the other fringe opposition he beat.

I think the resumes of the two are very comparable and Froch has definitely fought the tougher opposition overall, but Joe was far and away the best in his division and was the number 3 p4p fighter. Froch was always the next best after Ward, although he did beat Groves who's the best right now.

Like I said I'm not into comparison of resume it's all a bit dross, but when you watch the two guys fights, despite Froch being a lot more exciting I think it's clear that Calzaghe was the better fighter.

I do wish it was the other way round though, I was quite a big fan of Froch when he was fighting and I much preferred him as a fighter and a role model. But I think JC was the better actual fighter.

 

Kessler had injury problems throughout his career, he was an amazing fighter and aside from Ward the best SMW either man faced imo. I favour him to do a number on Groves in a time machine matchup.

Maybe Froch would win some latter rounds but I reckon Hopkins would beat him at any point during their careers when a fight could have been made. Hopkins is all wrong for Froch.

I'm not arsed about retaining respectability for either fighter tbh, it doesn't bother me what others think about either guy, as I said I'd have rooted for Froch anyways. I'm just saying what my thoughts are. I find resume boring. I prefer matching them stylistically.

 

I struggle to envision Froch having any success against Hopkins especially given that Hopkins would probably still have been the quicker fighter.

Anyways as you said yourself h2h you favour Joe, that's what I rank on. Resume is a bit meh for me.

 

I can't stand Calzaghe and went through a stage of scoring his close fights in detail and I did one time manage to score both Reid and Hopkins against him. But when i watch both without my bias getting in the way I think it's fair to say the right man won, both times.

 

Hopkins is better than both of them, a younger Hopkins wins both fights imo.