Comments Thread For: Froch Details Why DeGale Makes No Sense, Chavez Does

[alexKO]

I don't care what he was regarded by people who can't see what's infront of them, Jeff Lacy was a bum. Calzaghe gets credit because it's a fight the fans wanted but the fact remains that Lacy was no a good fighter.

Obviously Froch's win over Bute is much better than that.

Lacy was one of three fighters Calzaghe fought who were in the Top 5 of the division being fought in. His resume is pityful.

Well I thought Robin Reid beat a prime Calzaghe so it wouldn't shock me if Froch did.

A 10-year world champion is going to have faced plenty of fighters ranked in the top 5 of their division in the form of mandatory challengers. In fact, I can name 4 in Calzaghe's last 6 fights: Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy and Bika.

As for the Reid fight, I thought an under-par Calzaghe won a close decision. You could say the same with Froch regarding his controversial Dirrell fight. At the end of the day, they both came out with wins.

Ultimately, Calzaghe reigned for 10 years as Super Middleweight Champion, cleared up his mandatories, unified with Lacy and Kessler and retired as a two-weight lineal champion. Froch has never been the best fighter in his division, whereas Calzaghe was the best fighter in two divisions during an 11-year reign.

[alexKO]

Lacy looked terrible against Sheika.

Lacy didn't have a good win on his entire career.

Froch looked terrible against Taylor, Dirrell and Groves. But he won, as did Lacy against Sheika.

[IronDanHamza]

A 10-year world champion is going to have faced plenty of fighters ranked in the top 5 of their division in the form of mandatory challengers. In fact, I can name 4 in Calzaghe's last 6 fights: Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy and Bika.

As for the Reid fight, I thought an under-par Calzaghe won a close decision. You could say the same with Froch regarding his controversial Dirrell fight. At the end of the day, they both came out with wins.

Ultimately, Calzaghe reigned for 10 years as Super Middleweight Champion, cleared up his mandatories, unified with Lacy and Kessler and retired as a two-weight lineal champion. Froch has never been the best fighter in his division, whereas Calzaghe was the best fighter in two divisions during an 11-year reign.

No he actually fought 3; Kessler and Lacy (168) and Hopkins (175).

They're the only 3 he fought he were ranked in the top 5. Bika wasn't Top 5, he was an unproven green contender at that point.

Nothing to do with comparing each other's controversial decisions, you asked me do I really think Froch could beat Calzaghe and that was my answer.

[IronDanHamza]

Froch looked terrible against Taylor, Dirrell and Groves. But he won, as did Lacy against Sheika.

Ok and your point is?

My point is the fact Lacy struggled badly with a shot to **** Omar Sheika tells you how good he was.

[alexKO]

No he actually fought 3; Kessler and Lacy (168) and Hopkins (175).

They're the only 3 he fought he were ranked in the top 5. Bika wasn't Top 5, he was an unproven green contender at that point.

Nothing to do with comparing each other's controversial decisions, you asked me do I really think Froch could beat Calzaghe and that was my answer.

Bika was a mandatory and therefore ranked in the top 5. Whether he deserved to be is subjective but all I'm saying is Calzaghe fought a lot more than three top 5 fighters.

[alexKO]

Ok and your point is?

My point is the fact Lacy struggled badly with a shot to **** Omar Sheika tells you how good he was.

Again, you can say the same for Froch vs Taylor.

[IronDanHamza]

Bika was a mandatory and therefore ranked in the top 5. Whether he deserved to be is subjective but all I'm saying is Calzaghe fought a lot more than three top 5 fighters.

Just because he was mandatory doesn't make him top 5.

Froch wasn't top 5 at SMW when he was mandatory for Calzaghe's belt. Groves wasn't for his fight with Froch. And Bika wasn't when he fought Calzaghe.

Calzaghe fought 3 fighters in the top 5. That's factual.

[IronDanHamza]

Again, you can say the same for Froch vs Taylor.

Well no because Taylor is a good fighter.

Lacy struggled with a shot OMAR SHEIKA.

Jeff Lacy has zero good wins.

He was zero decent wins even.

[alexKO]

Just because he was mandatory doesn't make him top 5.

Froch wasn't top 5 at SMW when he was mandatory for Calzaghe's belt. Groves wasn't for his fight with Froch. And Bika wasn't when he fought Calzaghe.

Calzaghe fought 3 fighters in the top 5. That's factual.

You seem to be very strict on which fighters are 'top 5'. So applying your expertise, how many top 5 fighters has Froch beaten? If Bika doesn't count for Calzaghe, then Pascal, Dirrell, Johnson, Mack and Groves were on a similar level and don't cut it.

We're then left with 3 or 4 fighters in the top 5 for Froch, 2 of which he lost to: Ward, Kessler, Bute and Abraham (debatable based upon your ranking system). I'm sure your skewed criteria will account for this in Froch's favour however.

[alexKO]

Well no because Taylor is a good fighter.

Lacy struggled with a shot OMAR SHEIKA.

Jeff Lacy has zero good wins.

He was zero decent wins even.

Sheika was shot against Lacy, so was Taylor against Froch. Big deal.

Lacy was an undefeated world champion widely considered to be the best in the division prior to Calzaghe. Taylor was a shot middleweight who got beaten down by the one dimensional Pavlik at middleweight before blowing himself up to super middleweight to outbox Froch for 11 rounds.