Froch gets Cobra'd by Sir Joe!

[IronDanHamza]

Probably because he was paid for the sparring by Team Hayemaker. What's he going to say? "Yeah I absolutely battered Groves, he has no chance against DeGale"

People who spar each other always usually give each other respect afterwards. I think we all know he got taken to school in sparring.

Dirrell is levels above Groves in every way shape and form except maybe mentally. I keep hearing "wouldn't surprise me" which tells me you are not convinced. Dirrell would knock Groves out, any time or point in their careers. Unequivocally.

He wouldn't have to say it. I don't see why he would lie about it.

I don't know he got taken to school in sparring. What are you basing that off? A black eye?

Dirrell isn't levels above Groves. And aslong as Groves hasn't been full Cobra'd I'd pick him to beat Dirrell.

[slimshandy69]

Sounds like you're implying that Bika is on the same level as Bute but by your own logic surely that isn't the case considering Bute beat him easily?

I won't even entertain the idea of Robin Reid being better than Bute.

Does Calzaghe even have any wins better than Bute? Arguably one or two at best.

So just because he's more talented he poses a bigger challenge? Ward is more talented than Calzaghe. I wouldn't expect Calzaghe to win more Rounds than Froch did against Ward. Just because he's more talented means what? Just because he has a difference style means what?

Who is more talented Canelo or Maidana? And which one gave Mayweather more problems?

Calzaghe is more talented than Froch. Never disputed that. Does that mean he's a better fighter?

How many times are you going to bring up the same triangle theory that I counter with saying styles make fights? Calzaghe beat Kessler easier than Froch did. Ok so? Ali lost to Frazier and Norton while Foreman pollaxed Frazier and Norton. Just because A beat C better than B beat C doesn't make A better than B. That's been shown literally time and time and time again.

Going up in weight doesn't prove anything either. Or atleast doesn't necesseraily mean you're better.

Sorry mate, you have lost the debate. It was the "groves got a black eye in sparring by dirrell" part that did you in mate. Hope you recover from such slick debating skills.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Lmao Dirrell could not knock Curtis stevens out. Groves beat Degale, and Degale beat Dirrell.

So all your weird sparring black eye triangle theories aint going to fly with me.

BTW frch lost 115-113 against ward, hardly a schooing in America....

You literally just used a triangle theory you absolute ***ing spastic

DeGale and Groves were both novices when they fought and DeGale should have got the decision anyway.

DeGale has improved a lot since then and that's why he beat Dirrrell. Dirrell would easily beat George Groves at any point.

[-MAKAVELLI-]

it's a shame these two never went at it...i remember Froch wanted the fight

i was hoping it would have been Calzaghe's last fight...woulda been a good scrap but i think Joe takes it in a close one

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Sounds like you're implying that Bika is on the same level as Bute but by your own logic surely that isn't the case considering Bute beat him easily?

I won't even entertain the idea of Robin Reid being better than Bute.

Does Calzaghe even have any wins better than Bute? Arguably one or two at best.

So just because he's more talented he poses a bigger challenge? Ward is more talented than Calzaghe. I wouldn't expect Calzaghe to win more Rounds than Froch did against Ward. Just because he's more talented means what? Just because he has a difference style means what?

Who is more talented Canelo or Maidana? And which one gave Mayweather more problems?

Calzaghe is more talented than Froch. Never disputed that. Does that mean he's a better fighter?

How many times are you going to bring up the same triangle theory that I counter with saying styles make fights? Calzaghe beat Kessler easier than Froch did. Ok so? Ali lost to Frazier and Norton while Foreman pollaxed Frazier and Norton. Just because A beat C better than B beat C doesn't make A better than B. That's been shown literally time and time and time again.

Going up in weight doesn't prove anything either. Or atleast doesn't necesseraily mean you're better.

No Dan, of course Calzaghe has no wins that are better than the great Lucian Bute

It was proven not once but twice that Froch and Kessler are two evenly matched fighters who fought on terms over 24 hard fought rounds. Joe Calzaghe undressed Kessler easily over twelve. That's not a triangle theory - it clearly and distinctly shows that they are two different levels of fighters

Like I said, you are extremely anti-Calzaghe and a very big fan of Carl Froch. There's no point carrying this on.

[IronDanHamza]

it's a shame these two never went at it...i remember Froch wanted the fight

i was hoping it would have been Calzaghe's last fight...woulda been a good scrap but i think Joe takes it in a close one

Froch just wasn't known enough.

Calzaghe wanted big money fights only at that point. Similar to Froch now.

Difference is though is that Froch fought Groves which is the exact same situation.

Defintely would have been a good fight. A lot closer than people seem to think. Calzaghe H2H ability is vastly overrated on here anyway IMO and his general skill level.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

He wouldn't have to say it. I don't see why he would lie about it.

I don't know he got taken to school in sparring. What are you basing that off? A black eye?

Dirrell isn't levels above Groves. And aslong as Groves hasn't been full Cobra'd I'd pick him to beat Dirrell.

All he said was that Groves gave him some good work and that he wished him well against DeGale - standard stuff that most sparring partners say about each other. He didn't exactly nosh him off.

You'd pick Groves because you're trying to make Froch's win over him look better. He is not even in Dirrell's league.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Froch just wasn't known enough.

Calzaghe wanted big money fights only at that point. Similar to Froch now.

Difference is though is that Froch fought Groves which is the exact same situation.

Defintely would have been a good fight. A lot closer than people seem to think. Calzaghe H2H ability is vastly overrated on here anyway IMO and his general skill level.

No he didn't. Froch was given a lot of money to fight Groves which just was never there for Calzaghe to fight Froch compared to what he was getting in America. And basically Froch had no one else to fight or didn't want to fight anyone else (Ward).

[-MAKAVELLI-]

Froch just wasn't known enough.

Calzaghe wanted big money fights only at that point. Similar to Froch now.

Difference is though is that Froch fought Groves which is the exact same situation.

Defintely would have been a good fight. A lot closer than people seem to think. Calzaghe H2H ability is vastly overrated on here anyway IMO and his general skill level.

it woulda been one heckuva farewell fight...i really wanted to see that one happen

[IronDanHamza]

No Dan, of course Calzaghe has no wins that are better than the great Lucian Bute

It was proven not once but twice that Froch and Kessler are two evenly matched fighters who fought on terms over 24 hard fought rounds. Joe Calzaghe undressed Kessler easily over twelve. That's not a triangle theory - it clearly and distinctly shows that they are two different levels of fighters

Like I said, you are extremely anti-Calzaghe and a very big fan of Carl Froch. There's no point carrying this on.

Does he? There's Kessler, Hopkins, who else? Can't think of any.

That's not bigging up Bute, that's just showing how poor his resume is.

Ok, Manny Pacquaio and Juan Manuel Marquez had 3 razor close back and forth fights, the 4th one Pacquaio got sparked out cold.

Freddie Norwood on the other hand soundly beat a fresher Marquez on his first try.

Does that mean Norwood is distinctly better and on a different level to Pacquaio. Surely by your logic it does?

And also how the hell isn't that a triangle theory? You're saying fighter A is better than fighter B because A beat C better than B did. That's a pretty clear triangle theory if I've ever seen one.

My dislike for Calzaghe and my fondness of Froch doesn't cloud my judgment. I have no bias.