It's undeniable now... Joe Calzaghe > Froch

there is some ****ed up irrational hatred that you have going on there. like, seriously crazy.

you hate Welsh people don't you? i've seen your posts on Nathan Cleverly

instead of making a complete Tit of yourself, try getting a life.

you claiming that Groves is better than a prime Kessler or Hopkins, is just way too stupid for words.

now **** off you sad cretin. :good

 

Calzaghe didn't want Eubank, Calzaghe wanted Collins. Steve Collins was the WBO World Champion in 1997 when Calzaghe became mandatory and they were all set to fight each other before Collins got inured and pulled out and relinquished his belt. Eubank was conscriped by the WBO at late notice to stand in for Collins and dropped down from Light Heavyweight in something like 12 days to make the fight.

 

you decided I hate ALL welsh people based on posts about two individuals, an Englishman and a Welshman.

Should I really go on to read the rest of your post?

no, better you quit whilst ahead. better luck with your next post, son.

 

Are you for real?

Joe fought Kessler at that age! Kessler was an undefeated, established, unified champ with defences around the world under his belt. A known quantity who was supposed to be far too much for Calzaghe. This is the same man who beat Froch:rofl

Froch faced someone he was a big favourite to beat that hadn't yet been tested!

At the point when Calzaghe had beaten Kessler, Froch had not faced a single ex title holder or challenger. Je was a complete nobody on the world stage. His fight soon after the Kessler fit was against Robin Reid who had been retired. Reid was his first ex world title holder/challenger. His record was very poor at that stage.

****** did offer the fight to Froch but Froch didn't want it because of options supposedly. Look at the differences between what ****** had done for Calzaghe and what Hennesey had done for Carl and why would Carl not want to go under ****** should he win? Truth is he didn't think he could.

 

Joe was 35 for that fight, and he HAD to take it.

No one of that prime level before, and no one of that prime level after - speaks volumes.

Should you really be trying to compare Frochs sterling defence record with a guy who waited 10 years to make a meaningful defence.

and yes -thankyou for pointing out that Joe offered young unknown regional level kid froch a fight for a defence of his so called world title for peanuts but then as soon as Froch became a decent fighter he ran for the hills with the excuse that it didn't pay him enough.

 

If you're gonna fight all-comers home and away you will have some tough defences, but a win's a win.
Calzaghe didn't fight all-comers so had easier wins and an unbeaten record.
At the end of his career, after being knocked down by non-puncher Hopkins and shot Jones, he would have had a tough, bruising fight with a hungry, fresh Froch even if he won. He might have looked bad too, like his SD win over Robin Reid.
We'll never know, because he didn't take the challenege. That's the difference with Froch and Calzaghe. Froch can look bad fighting the toughest opposition, which in my opinion is better then looking great against nobodies and being unbeaten. I know whose career DVD I'd rather watch.

 

Okay but there were no other good 168 british boxers, apart from calzaghe, froch wanted him in the ring, but didnt happen.

Calzaghe wanted collins. And got eubank. Nice name to have on resume in 90's. Calzaghe didnt fight the up and comer, didnt make sense then, but would of had a meaning now.

 

We would never know because even if he was in his prime today he would never care to prove it. He would be fighting cabbies and bartenders in Wales without anyone giving a **** about it except a few drunks. Fact is, Froch is fighting top level competition and when you do that chances are you're going to look bad because these opponents weren't locally picked from the gutters, these opponents are there to compete. Hell Calzaghe was dropped by Kebabi Salem, ancient Hopkins, ancient Jones, Mitchell and even ancient inactive and semi-retired Eubank had him hurt badly.

Good luck responding to this without trolling.

 

Yet Manfredo made sense for some reason.

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/sunsport_columnists/article2395099.ece

Calzaghe was the one who wanted to make the fight not just noise.

 

Stopped Froch as an amateur and Froch was given his chance but knocked it back.

 

Froch would never defend against someone as crap as Manfrredo.


but I can think of someone who would do it for 10 years.

 

Manfredo > Mack

 

brilliant, Joe never defended even two titles at a time in his life (except against Bika, the sole foray into defending a non wbo title) so how he can hold multiple ones at the same time is a a terrible lie.

story of joes life, and sums up your output on Joe. Perfect thanks.

 

you admit it now, this gets better.

if a joe sycophant admits it, its got to be true.