Carl Froch has surpassed Joe Calzaghe

[SHB]

He was a challenger that's why Calzaghe didn't fight him. Calzaghe carefully selected his opponents that's why he was champion so may years. "i'm afraid of flying" wasn't so much when Hopkins and Jones were old.

Hopkins turned down Calzaghe years earlier after agreeing terms. Hopkins admits that himself.

Calzaghe was up at 175 at the time it's being argued he ducked Froch at 168. Cashing out vs Jones and then retiring instead of fighting the then unproven Froch at a lower weight is hardly ducking in this reality.

[daggum]

To you he has but I can't agree. Joe never lost a fight and he beat Jones and Hopkins in the USA. Joe ruled 168 for a long time with many successful defenses.

he clearly lost to hopkins and roy jones was shot to pieces. why even mention him? you can't fool diehards. that kind of crap might work at the pub or some place but not here.

he ruled 168? actually ottke ruled for about half the time he was there and he never fought him, he became default #1, then he fought lacy and kessler in a year's time and left. hardly ruling for a very long time. also 168 was a trash heap of fighters during that period until calzaghe/kessler was made.

[SHB]

Yes.

There's this one guy in Boxing right now who's just done it, actually. Supposed to be quite famous. What's his name? I think it's Floyd Mayweather or something.

There was this one guy a few years ago, from Asia, Manny Pacquaio his name was. Fought De La Hoya at 147, then moved down and fought Hatton.

Speaking of that Hatton guy, he fought Collazo at 147, did the unthinkable and moved back down to 140, THEN went back to 147 for Mayweather, THEN moved BACK DOWN to 140 again. That's a dare devil.

What are you trying to say here, that fighters moving up in weight then returning to that weight shortly after is something that doesn't happen? And you follow Boxing?

Here's the facts, Froch was the mandatory for Calzaghe's WBC and Calzaghe turned it down. That's a fact.

You saying "They never crossed paths" and "When was Froch the mandatory" is a failed attempt at re-writing history and nothing more.

I won't embarrass you by pointing out you've just listed a load of welterweights.

Remind me again what Froch brought to the table for Calzaghe to consider postponing retirement?

[Y0@NN]

Froch has more quality wins but lost his biggest fight. Calzaghe has a thinner resume but his biggest wins (Hopkins and fresher Kessler) are better than Froch's and he was a 2 division lineal champ.

[IronDanHamza]

Froch is a beast but sorry he doesn't rank higher than Calzaghe....Calzaghes resume is itself littered with wins over Hall of Famers....

Froch would need a win over Ward and another similarly ranked fighter to be on par..... Still possible.

Calzaghe beat two hall of famers.

One was shot to pieces and the other was in his 40's.

"Littered" with HOF'ers?

[daggum]

Hopkins turned down Calzaghe years earlier after agreeing terms. Hopkins admits that himself.

Calzaghe was up at 175 at the time it's being argued he ducked Froch at 168. Cashing out vs Jones and then retiring instead of fighting the then unproven Froch at a lower weight is hardly ducking in this reality.

why didn't he cash out vs froch? he did 50-50 with jones uhhhh what a bad deal. also why did he have to retire? he just made it to the top and then he retires? makes no sense. all those bum fights wore him out lol.

[White_Knight]

Being undefeated automatically makes you TBE doe.

[daggum]

Calzaghe beat two hall of famers.

One was shot to pieces and the other was in his 40's.

"Littered" with HOF'ers?

he's probably counting kessler for some reason and eubank who's not in the hall and wasn't even a top fighter when calzaghe fought him yet i'm sure calzaghe fans would still pretend he was since they pretend jones was.

[SHB]

why didn't he cash out vs froch? he did 50-50 with jones uhhhh what a bad deal. also why did he have to retire? he just made it to the top and then he retires? makes no sense. all those bum fights wore him out lol.

Jones was more money. It was a slush fund fight.

Seriously, look who Froch had fought up to 2008. He'd done nothing to make it happen. If he'd fought Froch then, you'd have been even more critical.

[IronDanHamza]

I won't embarrass you by pointing out you've just listed a load of welterweights.

Ok, and? What difference does it make if they're Welterweights?

You asked when do fighters move up in weight then return to that weight.

Are Welterweights not allowed?

Remind me again what Froch brought to the table for Calzaghe to consider postponing retirement?

Postponing retirment? He could have fought him instead of Roy Jones.

But either way, it doesn't matter what he brought to the table.

Froch was the mandatory and Calzaghe did turn it down.

These are facts.

And something you tried to sweep under the rug and make up false claims in an attempt to re-write history.