Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest Super-Middle of All Times

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #71
    Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
    I still don't understand how Froch can be considered the best ever at 168. He's lost twice and should have lost to Dirrell in my opinion. His resume is not better than Ward's and I don't even think it's debatable.

    Ward clearly beat him. You cant pretend that didn't happen.
    How can it possibly not be debatable?

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by IronDanHamza View Post
      How can it possibly not be debatable?
      LOL Dan you know I like you and always respect your opinion. But how can you possibly equate a fighter with another fighter that dominated him and handily beat the other fighter that put a loss on the said fighters record?


      Beating Bute does not elevate Froch to number one in the division. In hindsight we can all see Bute has holes in his game.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by soul_survivor View Post
        There is an argument to be made that Froch is the best SMW of his generation, that being the resume. Heck Froch fought Bute when he was viewed as untouchable and some had him ranked higher than Ward. Personally, I'm not sure if I'd make that argument, both guys should be ranked alongside each other, one place higher or lower than the other. That's how I see it.


        so froch has a better resume because he beat lucian bute?

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
          LOL Dan you know I like you and always respect your opinion. But how can you possibly equate a fighter with another fighter that dominated him and handily beat the other fighter that put a loss on the said fighters record?


          Beating Bute does not elevate Froch to number one in the division. In hindsight we can all see Bute has holes in his game.
          Because Ward has little other than that.

          Froch has lots of good wins.

          There's absolutely no doubt Froch has the quantity, and quite the edge.

          Ward has the quality, and the win over Froch himself.

          So it's debatable, who has the better resume. That's at the absolute least.

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by IronDanHamza View Post
            Because Ward has little other than that.

            Froch has lots of good wins.

            There's absolutely no doubt Froch has the quantity, and quite the edge.

            Ward has the quality, and the win over Froch himself.

            So it's debatable, who has the better resume. That's at the absolute least.



            which froch wins make his resume superior to one that includes whitewashes of a better kessler than the one froch beat, and froch himself?

            Comment


            • #76
              personally, i don't think there's much of a need to bring any evidence into the discussion if the participants are people who genuinely know the sport and have no bias on the subject.


              is carl froch the best SMW of this era?
              don't be ridiculous. andre ward was the best SMW of this era.

              Comment


              • #77
                Originally posted by New England View Post
                which froch wins make his resume superior to one that includes whitewashes of a better kessler than the one froch beat, and froch himself?
                He doesn't have better wins. Not disputed that.

                Froch and Kessler are the best wins between them.

                But he doesn't have much more than that.

                Whereas Froch has Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler Pascal, Bute, Groves x2, Abraham.

                Ward has clear edge in quality, Froch had the clear edge in quantity.

                It's a non issue because now Ward's out his contract Ward will fly ahead. He could have already if he wasn't side lined for the past 3 years.
                Last edited by IronDanHamza; 01-13-2015, 04:36 PM.

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
                  I still don't understand how Froch can be considered the best ever at 168. He's lost twice and should have lost to Dirrell in my opinion. His resume is not better than Ward's and I don't even think it's debatable.

                  Ward clearly beat him. You cant pretend that didn't happen.
                  I never said Froch was the best ever. My point was that there is not a clear definitive answer to this question.

                  The only fighter that can definitively put an end to all discussion is Ward, especially now that his contract situation is cleaned up.

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by New England View Post
                    so froch has a better resume because he beat lucian bute?
                    Froch also has kessler, a better version of aa and a better performance, pascal, dirrell, taylor (past it by then but not bad at that stage), groves and kessler.

                    anymore ****** questions?

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by New England View Post
                      so froch has a better resume because he beat lucian bute?
                      When Froch fought Bute he was an underdog in his own home country. So that has to be impressive.

                      Ward had the same opportunity to fight Bute but said no thanks.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP