James J Corbett vs Carl Froch

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by KeedCubano, May 17, 2020.


Who Wins?

  1. Froch

    57.7%
  2. Corbett

    42.3%
  1. Dubblechin

    Dubblechin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,648
    18,474
    Jun 25, 2014
    Froch knocks the thong out of Corbett's crack.
     
  2. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft He Who Saw The Deep Full Member

    27,132
    44,905
    Mar 3, 2019
    :lol:
     
  3. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,754
    46,442
    Feb 11, 2005
    I guess you can into this how I feel fighters from that era and this era compare head to head.
     
    cross_trainer likes this.
  4. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,547
    9,575
    May 30, 2019
    Corbett was bigger and faster than Froch. I think that it's quite important advantage.
     
  5. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,754
    46,442
    Feb 11, 2005
    Froch was the same height, had longer reach. Froch's ring weight was pushing 180 if memory serves.

    The things that Corbett does "faster" than Froch I would barely label as boxing. What Froch does IS boxing.
     
    cross_trainer, KuRuPT and mrkoolkevin like this.
  6. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,754
    46,442
    Feb 11, 2005
  7. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,171
    25,408
    Jan 3, 2007
    I’ve never been able to see the rationale with having matchups like these. The eras are so far apart that you’re literally talking about two different sports when you look at the vast differences in rules and circumstances
     
    WAR01 likes this.
  8. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,754
    46,442
    Feb 11, 2005
    The essence of hitting and not getting hit remains unchanged.
     
  9. Knights107

    Knights107 Member Full Member

    450
    211
    Aug 13, 2015
    froch is SMW.
    corbett is fair LHW (HW at his Time).

    i pick corbett..

    he can handle HW at his time & he can handle froch power.
    Froch not quick enough.
     
  10. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,754
    46,442
    Feb 11, 2005
    According to a report from San Fran Chronicle on the eve of the Fitz fight, Robert's weight was claimed low and Corbett's was claimed high. The reporter said consensus was that Corbett weighed 170 and no more.

    Froch came in the ring over 180.

    The difference really here is that Froch knew how to box.
     
  11. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,595
    27,267
    Feb 15, 2006
    I could find you half a dozen different figures for Corbett's weight.

    The bottom line is that we don't know, and you don't get to cherry pick the one you want.
    Have you actually seen footage of Froch.

    He had an unorthodox style that worked, but the idea that he represents some evolution in boxing technique, is laughable.

    He is probably the best argument that the old time style would have worked in his era!
     
    70sFan865 likes this.
  12. Bukkake

    Bukkake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,493
    3,720
    Apr 20, 2010
    I think Corbett is the best argument that old time style wouldn't have worked in this era!

    I mean, he was thought of as one of the best in his own time - but would likely have been out of his depth against even half-decent champions 100+ years later.
     
    cross_trainer likes this.
  13. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,547
    9,575
    May 30, 2019
    I don't know, I fancy his chances against Froch.
     
  14. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,125
    Jun 2, 2006
    Yes,but if it was Andre Ward ,I think Corbett would get a drubbing.
     
    Bukkake likes this.
  15. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft He Who Saw The Deep Full Member

    27,132
    44,905
    Mar 3, 2019
    This is the GOAT fantasy match-up.
     
    70sFan865 likes this.