which resume is greater, quality or quantity?

Joe Calzaghe was a joke. He waited till the best of his era were well past it to fight them. Some might compare him to Mayweather in his safety first style and shrewd business acumen which valued being undefeated over fighting the best.

Calslappy lost to B-Hop. Anybody who says otherwise is Welsh or don't know how to score a fight. B-Hop won (off the top of my head) the first 5 rounds with a knockdown - very clearly. He won 5 of the first 6 CLEAR with a knockdown! Without taking the other rounds into account and there is noway Joe pitched a shutout. How could he possibly of lost by such margins? 116-111, laughable! http://i56.tinypic.com/smaryc.gif Rounds 2 & 3 to Joe - Laughable. He was hitting thin air all night. All the clean, effective punches was from B-Hop! Not too mention the gift he got against Reid who beat the hell out of him

Froch has fought and beat tougher opposition overall. If Calzaghe had an opponent as tough as Ward in the division he wouldn't have been lineal either. B-Hop made Calzaghe look sloppy. Even if Calzaghe won on the scoring B-Hop at his age came away with more credence out of that fight. When Bhop threw, he landed. Calzaghe was throwing 10 slaps to land 1. So then you've got Kessler. Fair play Joe beat a younger, better version, but that's just styles. Sorry but Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler, Abraham, Johnson, Ward, Bute, Mack, Kessler, Groves, Groves Is far a better run of world class opposition than Calzaghe ever fought. i agree, he has the deeper resume and his run is much tougher than calzaghe BUT he hasnt beaten the better fighters therefore i cant say he has the better resume. bhop even at that age can make anyone look sloppy and throwing '10 slaps to land 1' is a effective strategy in beating bhops style. honestly i thought calzaghe beat bhop comfortably, i had it much wider than the judges scorecards. i think calzaghe style matches up very well against ward, i would pick calzaghe in that fight

Froch has fought and beat tougher opposition overall. If Calzaghe had an opponent as tough as Ward in the division he wouldn't have been lineal either. B-Hop made Calzaghe look sloppy. Even if Calzaghe won on the scoring B-Hop at his age came away with more credence out of that fight. When Bhop threw, he landed. Calzaghe was throwing 10 slaps to land 1. So then you've got Kessler. Fair play Joe beat a younger, better version, but that's just styles. Sorry but Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler, Abraham, Johnson, Ward, Bute, Mack, Kessler, Groves, Groves Is far a better run of world class opposition than Calzaghe ever fought.

If you're having a pop at Ali Raymi, I'm telling you now, Back Off Sir! He is the G.O.A.T! Only fights undefeated fighters and all via round 1 KO. AliOneManArmyRaymi!

Kessler and Hopkins are 2 wins. Froch has a hell of a lot more than 2 wins. i never said otherwise, the question is having a deeper resume better than having the bigger wins? i dont think so.

Any fighter who has a ... but no one is arguing froch is lucky. he is a great fighter no doubt, im just arguing that calzaghe best wins are greater than frochs best wins therefore he has the better resume

Kessler and Hopkins are 2 wins. Froch has a hell of a lot more than 2 wins.

who are u referring to? Any fighter who has a ... ... long record of high-quality victories...

Quality and when said fighter fought whom in their prime, or even close to it. :fingersx:

It's hard to successfully argue a fighter with a long record of high-quality victories was "lucky". who are u referring to?

It's hard to successfully argue a fighter with a long record of high-quality victories was "lucky".