Is Froch an ATG

It depends on how you lose. Billy Conn losing to Joe Louis is not the same as some "bum" losing to Joe Louis. Frazier losing to Ali in the Thrila in Manila is not the same as Wepner losing to Ali. Hearns losing to SRL was not a bum's loss. He pushed SRL (arguably the best fighter in the last 30 years) to the limit. "You're blowing it son. You're blowing it." On that same token, Froch only has a losing record to Andre Ward, possibly the greatest SMW of all time.

loses do not count on resumes man It depends on how you lose. Billy Conn losing to Joe Louis is not the same as some "bum" losing to Joe Louis. Frazier losing to Ali in the Thrila in Manila is not the same as Wepner losing to Ali. Hearns losing to SRL was not a bum's loss. He pushed SRL (arguably the best fighter in the last 30 years) to the limit. "You're blowing it son. You're blowing it."

loses do not count on resumes man it count if they're FOTY loses, and they're not just FOTY loses but hearns defeat to SRL and Hagler are ATG moments

ok lets compare it, hearns resume: Leonard - atg- lose and draw(possibly win) - foty and nomination of foty duran - atg - win - k.o of the year hagler - atg - lose - foty benitez - hof - win - nomination of foty virgil hill - hof - win - cuevas - hof - win - iran barkley - borderline hof - lose 2x foty roldan - good - win andries - good - win muangsurin - good - win doug dewitt - wbo mw champ- win eddie gazo - wba lmw champ- win mark medal - ibf lmw champ- win espada - wba ww champ- win bruce curry - wba slw champ- win james shuler- win james kinchen- win so that stacked resume and acclompisment it's not definitely better than froch?? Care to give us froch stacked resume?? Does he even have a hof in there? Maybe ward but froch lose right?? loses do not count on resumes man

we've got a thread dedicated to figuring out whether or not carl froch is an all time great. we're not allowed to talk about his resume, or how poorly he did against the best fighter of his generation at the weight. ability and resume are off limits. let's talk instead about how hot his girlfriend is, how much money he makes. It's bad luck on Froch's part that the best SMW of his era is the best SMW of all time.

He'll deservedly go to the hall of fame. He's an exceptional fighter. But he's not an all time great by my standards. Some people are too generous with that title.

we've got a thread dedicated to figuring out whether or not carl froch is an all time great. we're not allowed to talk about his resume, or how poorly he did against the best fighter of his generation at the weight. ability and resume are off limits. let's talk instead about how hot his girlfriend is, how much money he makes. I feel like I'm trying to explain algebra to a tree. Who said you couldn't criticise Froch's resume? You're welcome to criticise his resume, and you're welcome to take an artificially negative viewpoint of every victory on Froch's resume, as you have (I don't believe that you mean it, you're trolling out of some perception that Froch gets overrated by his fans at the expense of Andre Ward), just as I'm welcome to criticise your argument. That's debate.

we've got a thread dedicated to figuring out whether or not carl froch is an all time great. we're not allowed to talk about his resume, or how poorly he did against the best fighter of his generation at the weight. ability and resume are off limits. let's talk instead about how hot his girlfriend is, how much money he makes.

you can argue on bscene, but only if you're not doing it against our carl :lol1: keeping this avatar is one of the best decisions i've ever made.

It means that you're really awful at making your point and you make yourself sound like a child. I'm asking why you'd devalue your own point with logic-free nonsense like resume-trashing. It's only a step above the triangle theory (fighter A beat fighter B, and fighter B beat fighter C, therefore fighter A must beat fighter C - just in case you're unaware). It's really easy to pick apart even the best resume if you look at every victory from a negatively subjective viewpoint. It's pathetic. No, Carl Froch is not the best/greatest SMW of his era, but that's not the point I've tried to make. It's utterly irrelevant. Not that you're capable of keeping on track in a debate. Critical thinking skills are rarely present on this forum. I'm actually a huge fan of Andre Ward (seen him live twice now, once against Froch and once against Dawson), I'm just a fan of Carl Froch as well. They are both fantastic for the sport. i'm not allowed to talk about how overrated froch's resume is :lol1: stop being mean, NE! thanks for making these tremendous rules for bscene discourse. i'll be sure to follow them.

Froch has wins over mediocre fighters and struggled against a fossilised shot Johnson as well as deserving to lose against Durrell who never beat anybody, he looked terrible against Kessler both times and lost the first one, he was losing to an absolutely trash fighter in Groves. An unfocused Toney does whatever he wants with him. What happened when Toney fought Dave Tiberi? Who was a complete and utter bum by the way.

I rate Froch as a borderline HOF fighter and I don't think that Ward is a HOFer either. Ward may have the skills but he hasn't fought enough. But then again I don't think that Ingemar Johansson or Arturo Gatti belong there either. I would like to see fan favorite sections or even fighter of the decade areas where you could list fighters that ought to be remembered (such as Gerald McClellan and Nigel Benn). **** fan section, Benn, Eubank and naz should already be there no questions asked

HOF yes. Easy. ATG, no. Not in the standard it should be regarded at. One thing makes me laugh at Yank logic though, if Froch isn't as good as they suggest, why do they regard Ward so highly? After all, he is his best win. Morons. I rate Froch as a borderline HOF fighter and I don't think that Ward is a HOFer either. Ward may have the skills but he hasn't fought enough. But then again I don't think that Ingemar Johansson or Arturo Gatti belong there either. I would like to see fan favorite sections or even fighter of the decade areas where you could list fighters that ought to be remembered (such as Gerald McClellan and Nigel Benn).

HOF yes. Easy. ATG, no. Not in the standard it should be regarded at. One thing makes me laugh at Yank logic though, if Froch isn't as good as they suggest, why do they regard Ward so highly? After all, he is his best win. Morons.

He's an ATG British fighter and guaranteed Hall of Famer. I feel Froch is seriously underrated. Froch is also truly a 15 round fighter in the 12 round era.

Froch has wins over mediocre fighters and struggled against a fossilised shot Johnson as well as deserving to lose against Durrell who never beat anybody, he looked terrible against Kessler both times and lost the first one, he was losing to an absolutely trash fighter in Groves. An unfocused Toney does whatever he wants with him. I don't think he struggled with Johnson I thought he won that comfortably. Passed it when he fought Groves, and struggled yes but pulled it out. Rectified in the rematch. You can say the exact same for Toney just against worse fighters so it goes both ways. Unfocused Toney definitely doesn't have an easy time like I said I've watched him very arguably lose to sub par opposition many times so I'm not so sure about that last statment.

my game is weak :lol1:. what does that mean, exactly? "are you really sh#tting on our carl's resume in a thread about whether or not he's an ATG?" is that what you are asking? is froch the best / greatest SMW of his era? It means that you're really awful at making your point and you make yourself sound like a child. I'm asking why you'd devalue your own point with logic-free nonsense like resume-trashing. It's only a step above the triangle theory (fighter A beat fighter B, and fighter B beat fighter C, therefore fighter A must beat fighter C - just in case you're unaware). It's really easy to pick apart even the best resume if you look at every victory from a negatively subjective viewpoint. It's pathetic. No, Carl Froch is not the best/greatest SMW of his era, but that's not the point I've tried to make. It's utterly irrelevant. Not that you're capable of keeping on track in a debate. Critical thinking skills are rarely present on this forum. I'm actually a huge fan of Andre Ward (seen him live twice now, once against Froch and once against Dawson), I'm just a fan of Carl Froch as well. They are both fantastic for the sport.

if you can fight off the tears, turn the sound off and watch this fight. focus on the punches landed, and their effect. that's how you score a fight. take your union jack underpants off, and give an unbiased card. the fight was not close. froch was completely outclassed. Ward's PEDs started to wear off in the later rounds and he was hanging on for dear life. Froch stops him in a 15 rounder or with random testing.

NO! Good Career Tough!

Are you really playing the resume trash game? That's about as pathetic as it gets for a boxing fan, triangle theories aside. Look what I can do: Andre Ward: Kessler - Euro bum whose only significant win is over another Euro bum in Froch. Allan Green - club fighter with power, with no significant win on his record. Sakio Bika - just a dirty mauler, again without a significant victory to his name. Arthur Abraham - shot version of Abraham who had already been schooled twice by injury-faker Dirrell and Euro bum Froch. Carl Froch - Euro bum with lots of wins against fighters with lots of asterisks next to their name, Chad Dawson - shot fighter down at a weight he couldn't make safely. Edwin Rodriguez - weak challenger with no significant win. It's really easy to either dismiss or devalue just about any win on any record in the sport. Your game is really ****ing weak and you completely undermined your own point about Ward not struggling in the final rounds against Froch. I completely agree, I'm a fan of both fighters and I thought Ward won virtually every round. Stay away from this resume bull****. my game is weak :lol1:. what does that mean, exactly? "are you really sh#tting on our carl's resume in a thread about whether or not he's an ATG?" is that what you are asking? is froch the best / greatest SMW of his era?