The greatest in the Super and Junior weight classes?

[LacedUp]

No, but he's considered to be the greatest LHW of all time. Which was what I was referring to.

In actual fact, he did win the HW Title. So by your logic, he's a greater HW than he is a LHW, no?

Who do you rank higher at WW? Pacquaio or Baldomir? After all, Pacquaio's never actually won the belt. Baldomir has. All Pacquaio is a glorified title holder so he can't be ranked higher can he?

Saying "Some think he drew his last fight with Kessler" is about as meaningless as saying "Quite a lot though he won the first fight with Kessler"

In regards to people agreeing with me, most people considered Ward and Froch to be the consensus #1 and #2 after the Bute fight. Considering the short history of the SMW division. After his win over Kessler I'm sure it's cemented in a lot of people minds.

Tell me who has a better resume than him at 168 and then maybe I can take what you're saying seriously.

Not just "some people think he lost to Dirrel" or "One judge had the Johnson fight a draw" or "some people think the Pascal fight was a draw".

He won a vacant belt, after Louis had retired. I wouldn't say a one year spell as 'champion' equals the best of all times, which is what I was referring to. With regards to him being the greatest LHW of all times, I'm not sure - but def top 3. Tunney, is another great LHW. Foster, Langford if you rank him, Moore are all greats .(Spinks was very underrestimated as well. But Charles was probably the best P4P.

You might not think it's relevant, but if one of his major wins is based on a robbery, it does take something away from that victory.

He's had an incredible run, but a critic would point out that Taylor had recently been ko'd, Abraham had just been schooled by Dirrell, he lost to Kessler, beat a 42 year old Johnson and lost to Ward.

He's then had another very good run of fights with 2 good opponents and one, well, not so good.

Basically, Ward's wins over Kessler, Froch, Bika, Miranda, Green and Dawson are very much on par or better than Froch's wins considering he won against Kessler when he was a champion, won against Froch when he was champion and against Dawson when he was champion at LHW.

Joe Calzaghes run of wins over an unbeaten Kessler, unbeaten Lacy, Bika who had only lost a very dubious decision, Robin Reid and Chris Eubank is also very very close to Froch's, if not higher. Add to that a win over Hopkins albeit in a different weight class.

At the best he can hope for a place in top 5, but even that is a stretch. Nigel Benn, Eubank, Toney, RJJ, Collins, Park - these guys would all have something to say.

But I'm sure you will leave another arrogant reply as to why a person who has never even been the best in his era, is the best of all times.

[joseph5620]

Agreed, Locche had terrific skills. JCC w#for me was just such a beast at the weight and I'm pretty sure he lost to Whitaker at 147? And I've always thought the JCC/Pea fight was far closer than some people make it out to be. My biggest problem with Whitaker and his style was that he relied too much on frustrating opponents with faints rather than actually getting off. It's what led him to lose to DLH.

That simply isn't true. That version of Whitaker was well past his prime and a poor example to use for his career. Whitaker in his prime didn't just rely on feints and "got off" plenty. The Chavez-Whitaker fight was as clear and one sided a victory for Whitaker as most reasonable and objective people saw it. It wasn't close no matter how you wan't to look at it.

[BennyST]

Yes.

Why? Is that far fetched?

I don't see anyone who has a better resume than him at 168 at this moment on time before Wards inevitable take over.

A little far fetched for me, but fair enough.

[Cardinal Buck]

Not sure what this means.

Style makes fights.

That one didn't come down to styles. Calzaghe was just better than Froch. Possibly the best win that Froch has is against a guy who Calzaghe beat at peak, and it took Froch two tries.

[Anthony342]

I can only speculate, but my answer is yes. His desperation to get a Chavez fight shows that. Lowest risk/highest return is almost always the final choice. And that applies to the vast majority of other fighters too.

So does anyone in boxing just fight the best opponents anymore or does everyone just fight for money these days?

[1SILVA]

168-roy jones
154-thomas hearns
140-aaron pryor
130-sandy saddler
122-wilfredo gomez
115-johnny tapia
108-jung koo chang

[Scott9945]

So does anyone in boxing just fight the best opponents anymore or does everyone just fight for money these days?

Every fighter wants to be known as great, but most of them are dealing with the reality of bills, debt, taxes, child support, etc. The idea is make as much money as you can in the years that you are able to. It's nothing new, but it just appears different because fighters are only competing a couple of times a year now. And of course the people who make a percentage off the fighter are going to choose the best paying option. Remember that fighters don't have unions and don't collect pensions when they retire.

[BennyST]

That one didn't come down to styles. Calzaghe was just better than Froch. Possibly the best win that Froch has is against a guy who Calzaghe beat at peak, and it took Froch two tries.

Not possibly, undoubtedly. Kessler is easily the best win on Froch's resume.

It's a bit odd, but whatever. I've seen weirder. A tough run, warrior attitude and some good wins along with an hilarious personality doesn't = greatest ever when it's pretty clearly not the case, as much as I'd like it to be in Froch's case.

One of the most underrated trash talkers of all time, yes, the greatest SMW of all time, no.

[Cardinal Buck]

^True, but the Bute win was pretty good considering how Froch won.

[Scott9945]

^True, but the Bute win was pretty good considering how Froch won.

I'd pick the Bute win for sure. Bute was a lot closer to his prime and the win was so decisive it killed a lucrative rematch clause in Montreal.