It's impossible to know who out of the two was the better fighter by comparing perceptions of both. I mean, sure - I think Calzaghe was faster and had a greater arsenal of punches whilst Froch edged it in terms of chin and punching power (judged across the entirety of both careers). But perceptions are often contrary to truth. No amount of dreaming such a fight can lead to any valuable conclusions.
That said, purely on his fight record (which aint open to interpretation) - Froch would seem to hold the advantage.
That said, purely on his fight record (which aint open to interpretation) - Froch would seem to hold the advantage.
Comment