If Andre Ward is genuinely retired...

[soul_survivor]

That weight is not a real stalwart division that is one of the original divisions, I don't think one can confine fights to that weight as a serious attempt to show domintion. The tournament was the best idea actually partially for this reason, it allowed one guy to clean the division out...I could see a situation where a guy fought at the middle weight divisions then became a cruiser, or light heavy or something... Especially to chase low hanging fruit... but one cannot accuse Ward of this strategy.

I think it weakens the integrity of your argument when you try to state the common condition of opponents... Even if its true Abraham was not as good, he would have never beaten Ward! Also Froch lost once to Kessler so that obviates a lot of that argument regarding Kessler... Ward beat Kessler pretty easily and... he beat Froch.

On the other hand the argument does have a logic to it that I recognize, while not agreeing with the conclusions: First of all, your right that Froch fought Brute and Groves and Kessler a second time for a win, but we have to counter balance that because Ward fought good competition when he left the division after clearing out the division in the tourney. I would he more inclined to your thinking if we were talking about an original weight class and the surrounding divisions (Middle weights who fought super middle perhaps) and we had a guy who then jumped up to cruiser lets say... especially a guy who jumped up when there was low hanging fruit in the heavier divisions. I would also be more inclined if you didn't have to qualify any of the common opponents both men fought... Ward would have always beat Abraham lol and Froch lost his first fight to Kessler and imo that makes it a little disingenious talking like Ward fought inferior versions.

I do see the argument though and again it has a certain logic to it.

Bottom line, Froch's list of opponents, wins and way of winning is more impressive than Ward's. I think my first post illustrated that.

Neither however, can or has overtaken Calzaghe or Eubank at the top of the division and neither looked as unbeatable as the version of Jones that fought at 168.

That's all I'll say on the matter.

[Eff Pandas]

No where officially cuz it's all subjective dork sh^t or wherever you want him to if your a boxing sci fi fantasy dork.

[billeau2]

Bottom line, Froch's list of opponents, wins and way of winning is more impressive than Ward's. I think my first post illustrated that.

Neither however, can or has overtaken Calzaghe or Eubank at the top of the division and neither looked as unbeatable as the version of Jones that fought at 168.

That's all I'll say on the matter.

Is that what you mean to say? Your original argument was that at the specific weight 168 specifically, Froch fought better men... If you are extending that to unconditionally and all weight divisions, then the argument is not the same... thats putting it diplomatically.

Also my comment was not directed at the second statements regarding Calzaghe, Eubanks, Jones... Just to be clear. I disagree with this analysis but don't believe it is constructive to argue the point because many have argued the merits/demerits of Joe lol. Also while I might take issue with Eubanks and Calzaghe, Jones is a different issue and a different class of fighter. No desire to go through that rabbit hole and the visectitudes that it produces!

[Anthony342]

How does Ward rank during his own era then, just the years in which he competed? Where does he rank pound for pound during that time? Top 5?

[joseph5620]

Bottom line, Froch's list of opponents, wins and way of winning is more impressive than Ward's. I think my first post illustrated that.

Neither however, can or has overtaken Calzaghe or Eubank at the top of the division and neither looked as unbeatable as the version of Jones that fought at 168.

That's all I'll say on the matter.

Bottom line is that he lost to Ward and your spin won't change that. The list of opponents are not better either. So your post makes no sense as usual.

[Anthony342]

So, how good was Ward and where does he rank during his own era?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Bottom line, Froch's list of opponents, wins and way of winning is more impressive than Ward's. I think my first post illustrated that.

Neither however, can or has overtaken Calzaghe or Eubank at the top of the division and neither looked as unbeatable as the version of Jones that fought at 168.

That's all I'll say on the matter.

Ward craps all over calzaghe and Eubanks


Roy Jones,,, whatever, hard to compare anybody to Roy


Ward cleaned out 168 in dominant fashion,,, literally not one close fight


Ward, much like an ali or Leonard, was a winner,, Always found the way to win.

The 2 kovolev fights sealed the deal on Ward being not just hall of famer, but a legit ATG

[TheThirdEye]

Ward craps all over calzaghe and Eubanks


Roy Jones,,, whatever, hard to compare anybody to Roy


Ward cleaned out 168 in dominant fashion,,, literally not one close fight


Ward, much like an ali or Leonard, was a winner,, Always found the way to win.

The 2 kovolev fights sealed the deal on Ward being not just hall of famer, but a legit ATG

BTW, you can't be an ATG if you step out of the sport to avoid a 40+ years old boxer from Canada.
The world #1 P4P retired from boxing, just to duck the Undisputed matchup of the LHW division against the Lineal WBC Champ.

Andre Ward says "Adonis Stevenson had opportunities, he disqualified himself".
But what about Ward, I mean Ward had opportunities to become Undisputed, and he disqualified himself by retiring instead of fighting Stevenson. Why would we give an ATG metal to such liar; Ward did what he accused Stevenson of.
Virgil Hunter's not better, saying there's no money fighting Stevenson in Canada or else. What about their attempt to fight Frank Buglioni, what about him; "was there more "prestige" or more money on the table to fight that guy, was their a legit belt, a major belt, a lineal title or an Undisputed recognition to fight Frank in UK instead of making history against Stevenson in Canada or US?"
The answer is: NO

*So why would we crown a coward ATG for, why?

[soul_survivor]

Is that what you mean to say? Your original argument was that at the specific weight 168 specifically, Froch fought better men... If you are extending that to unconditionally and all weight divisions, then the argument is not the same... thats putting it diplomatically.

Also my comment was not directed at the second statements regarding Calzaghe, Eubanks, Jones... Just to be clear. I disagree with this analysis but don't believe it is constructive to argue the point because many have argued the merits/demerits of Joe lol. Also while I might take issue with Eubanks and Calzaghe, Jones is a different issue and a different class of fighter. No desire to go through that rabbit hole and the visectitudes that it produces!

My argument has always been about 168. I don't think I ever mentioned another division.

Heck Ward has only one notable win outside of 168 but that's besides the point of this thread. I wanted to stay on point with the topic.

[just the facts]

Are fighters only ranked h2h?

Ward flat out accomplished more at 168 than Froch did. Throw in a H2H win and it's clear.