Who has the Better Resume Froch or Calzaghe?

[bravestone]

I love when people list guys like Woodhall and Sheika for Calzaghe, than they straight up discredit top tier fighters and highly ranked fighters that greats like Floyd and Manny have beaten. But then they list lower tier fighters as good wins for guys like Calzaghe. Truly funny.

I give Joe credit for Hopkins, Lacy, Kessler, and Bika. He arguably lost to Hopkins.

I give Froch credit for Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Johnson, Bute, and Kessler. But he arguably lost to Dirrell.

It's got to be Froch.

Joe gives a rematch to Viet but not Reid. THAT is funny.

[IronDanHamza]

His mandatories, you mean?

Yeah.

Are you supposed to be credited when taking a meaningless mandatory defense now or something?

I see this all the time recently.

"Well, it was his mandatory".

Yes, and?

[BoxingGenius27]

Not to mention Calzaghe could've gave Froch a crack at the title before he retired.

It's not like Calzaghe took so much damage over his career and he couldn't fight anymore after the Jones victory. Sure, it was a medium risk fight with no reward, but looking back, Calzaghe missed an opportunity to further his legacy.

Froch called him out hard too, but Calzaghe was just content with retiring

[IronDanHamza]

I love when people list guys like Woodhall and Sheika for Calzaghe, than they straight up discredit top tier fighters and highly ranked fighters that greats like Floyd and Manny have beaten. But then they list lower tier fighters as good wins for guys like Calzaghe. Truly funny.

I give Joe credit for Hopkins, Lacy, Kessler, and Bika. He arguably lost to Hopkins.

I give Froch credit for Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Johnson, Bute, and Kessler. But he arguably lost to Dirrell.

It's got to be Froch.

You would think Richie Woodhall was considered to be a good fighter or something back then

I have absolutely no idea why there are people who think Richie Woodhall was a good fighter but I see his name coming up a lot in the last year or so. Perhaps because he's on Sky all the time.

The guy was dead average, at best. At very best.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDanHamza

So, what you mean is "If Woodhall had won he'd be Top 5"

Well, the lost so that's compeltely irrelevant. And he lost fight clearly IMO.

Eubank? Please.

Brewer who has 2-2 going into that fight. Both loss's with controversy but still a 3 round up and down war with Atwon Echols who himself was coming off a beating and stoppage loss to Hopkins.

Mitchell coming off a loss.

Robin Reid I felt he lost the fight and so did many others.

Bika is one of his best wins which in itself tells the story of his career.

Reeling off names like Omar Shieka and guys like Richie Woodhall in general tell the story even further.

Hopkins, Kessler and Lacy are good wins against top opposition and they are the only 3 fights you can say that about.

It's not "emphasising top 5" I'm merely stating a fact. He fought 3 fighters his entire career who were amongst the Top 5 in his division which is pathetic, frankly.

The "Bus Boy's" being referred to are the title defenses against the likes of Ricky Thornberry, Branko Sobot, Tucker Pudwill and the other hilariously terrible and meaningless title defenses he had.

No doubt he had some, and more than that, bad ones. Everyone with 20 or so defenses in any division has their share. I didn't feel he lost to Reid and Beyer barely won against Woodhall with the knockdowns. Those were both solid wins. Again, I think era counts too. He fought a lot of junk and missed, what, Ottke who had no interest? Girard? That's the bigger issue with Calzaghe: he could have moved up sooner but at Super Middleweight it was just a fairly bad time. The difference between 5 and 9 for most of his reign was nada.

Froch's strength of schedule is surely superior though. It's superior to almost everyone's in the last 15 years.

Well, that's not really neither fighter's fault is it? You can't say oh Cal wouldve been better if he was in this era. We gotta go by what we got and that's Froch with the better resume. And still going...


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[bravestone]

"I'm not chasing after Roy Jones. Be honest, Roy Jones is a good fighter and I don't want tough fights, I just want big money."

More-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/4861904.stm

[crold1]

Well, that's not really neither fighter's fault is it? You can't say oh Cal wouldve been better if he was in this era. We gotta go by what we got and that's Froch with the better resume. And still going...


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Oh, I don't disagree. Froch has fought a tougher lot. I think Calzaghe fought enough good fighters to demonstrate he was the better fighter of the two. I wasn't big on Calzaghe for a lot of his career but I was a late convert. He was an exceptional fighter who should have done more with his talents.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

"I'm not chasing after Roy Jones. Be honest, Roy Jones is a good fighter and I don't want tough fights, I just want big money."

More-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/4861904.stm

Calducky...

He actually sounds like Mr Floyd Mayweather. Haha


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[bravestone]

Calducky...

He actually sounds like Mr Floyd Mayweather. Haha


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

He really does. Calzaghe moved up, hand his hands full with Hopkins and retired shortly after

[teddycanyon]

TS forgot Eubank from Calzaghe's resume. That's one of his most impressive victories!

anyway, resume-wise it's pretty close and may even lean towards Froch. But if they were ever to fight I'd still have to favor Calzaghe.