Comments Thread For: Enzo Calzaghe: Carl Froch is Not a Great Fighter

[Enzo Calzaghe]

Neither is your son, Enzo.

Yer a fackin ****. Stay out of Newbridge, mate.

[rampant]

All been said before! That is all!

[Xyei]

And all the Americans will rush to Frochs defence because while joe never lost to an American, meaning they have nothing over him, froch did and that makes him ok

That's ridiculous.

[Earl-Hickey]

That's ridiculous.

i know right

[komodo]

Yer a fackin ****. Stay out of Newbridge, mate.

[GRUSTLER]

Froch is already greater than his son by resume alone.

[IronDanHamza]

Yer a fackin ****. Stay out of Newbridge, mate.

[Weebler I]

Froch completely dominated by both Ward and Dirrell (before he brokedown mentally) shows you where he's at as a boxer.... Very good, just not GREAT. Man, some of ya'll don't know **** about boxing. It ain't about who gives the most entertaining fights or shown the most heart.. And btw Arturo Gatti wasn't GREAT neither. C level at best.

A couple of things...

(1) Dirrell did not 'completely dominate' Froch, it was a pathetic "fight" which Dirrell managed to edge.

(2) Gatti was better than a C level fighter, B+ imo.


Anyhow, on topic, as things stand I agree with Enzo although I would qualify his 'Froch is a good fighter' by saying that imo Froch is a very good fighter.

However Froch isn't finished yet, he could still become a great fighter should he win his next few bouts, his resume can hang with the best.

[mikeMack]

Calzage was not great either

Enzo is correct in stating Froch is not a great fighter. Froch like Calzage were good fighters not great. Joe would have beaten Froch in a decision by slapping Froch more over 12 rounds. Neither guy was great. Enzo has his opinion thta's it.

[Weebler I]

Joe Calzaghe was a great fighter, he beat Hopkins in his backyard and a prime Kessler, roughhoused it with Bika and punished the unbeaten Lacy.

Sure his resume could have been better, but he ticked all the boxes and was multi-dimensional fighter.