Comments Thread For: Is Carl Froch Still Obsessed With Joe Calzaghe?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Froch is bitter towards the world, and especially to people who beat him. Imagine if Dirrell didn't get robbed on the cards.

Yeah I had that fight 115-112 Dirrell, he probably would have been wishing death upon Dirrell after the Abraham fiasco.😂

He even has a weird bitterness towards irrelevant guys like DeGale, I remember when DeGale retired and Froch was talking about “smashing him to bits”.😂😂

He’s a megalomaniac...

[_Rexy_]

Yeah I had that fight 115-112 Dirrell, he probably would have been wishing death upon Dirrell after the Abraham fiasco.😂

He even has a weird bitterness towards irrelevant guys like DeGale, I remember when DeGale retired and Froch was talking about “smashing him to bits”.😂😂

He’s a megalomaniac...

I have no idea how those refs saw Froch winning that fight. Dirrell was just on another level that night.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I have no idea how those refs saw Froch winning that fight. Dirrell was just on another level that night.

Sadly that was probably the last good performance of his career.

If Dirrell was mentally tougher he’d have been a top fighter IMO.

[dannnnn]

Calzaghe would have battered Froch at any point while he (Calzaghe) was still active.

Issuing a challenge years after a prolonged retirement is really Froch's style. For somebody who had success in boxing, he's horribly insecure.

[Chollo Vista]

GTFOH...����

Calzaghe was the undisputed #1 at 168. He held every title available at the weight including the lineal title during his career. Also holds the record number of defences (20) at the weight. Also went up to 175 and beat B-Hop for the Ring 175 title and he actually beat a Prime Kessler.

Froch was never #1 at 168 that was Ward another guy Froch is pathetically bitter about. He never beat a fighter as good as Prime Kessler or even 43 YO Hopkins.

Calzaghe has greater accomplishments, wins, longevity etc. The only thing even comparable is resume.

And no... nobody wants to see two Middle Aged men come out of retirement.

Until you address this post that you frantically ran away from, please stop quoting me:

WTF is this man???

I never said he was undisputed champ!!!!! Seriously bro work on your comprehension! Read what I post...

Actually, I think it's you that needs the comprehension skills. The initial argument was you rated Joe so highly because he was a "lineal champ". Something I said wasn't impressive; hell, Carlos Baldomir was a lineal champ as was Pascal. I said if you really want to be impressive, than Joe should've became undisputed champ which he never was. You then proceeded to list all the belts Joe held at 168 as if that somehow made him "undisputed". That's how it started and was my overall point.

Can we move on from the weak lineal champ accomplishment?

I said he was the undisputed #1 which he was. Calzaghe was undoubtedly the #1 fighter at 168 after he beat a Lacy and Kessler. Froch was never the #1 fighter at 168, Ward was.

Why do you keep using "undisputed #1"? Just say he was the #1 guy in the weight class. If you're going to say undisputed, it should only be used when referring to an undisputed champ. Language matters.

Secondly, after you said the above statement, I came back and agreed with you. I agreed with you with a caveat, that Joe reigned over a weak 168 lb division. In which it was. You can't be a fan of the sport and not admit that Joe was in a weak era? I mean Jeff Lacy was considered Mike Tyson of the weight class. Come on man.

Hopkins was an elite win. He went on to beat Pavlik, Pascal etc after the Calzaghe fight. But I did say it was close, you are the one who compared it to Dirrell NOT ME.

Ok and if Hopkins was an elite win, than what does that make Jermaine Taylor? You still haven't answered that. Maybe it's because you know that will add an extra feather in Froch's cap

And yes I compared the Dirrel victory to show you how you can't discredit Froch's victory over Dirrel, while giving Joe full credit over Hopkins. Both were close and could've gone either way. If you're going to give Joe credit for his win because that's what the record says, you also have to do the same for Froch.

Kessler retired after he fought Froch cause he was done. Hopkins remained at the highest level for another 6 years after Joe beat him. It’s common sense mate!!! Clearly Hopkins was still an elite fighter, he beat Pascal who is Froch’s BEST WIN.

For one, you still haven't explaned what was so great about Kessler to make him, as you put it "elite" in the first place? No one ever heard of the guy before he fought Joe. And Kessler was no more done after he fought Froch the first time than Ward was after he fought Kovalev the 2nd time. Both fighters didn't take a great deal of punishment and could've easily continued their careers.

As for Hopkins, if you followed his career, you'd know that Hopkins was well over the hill, but resorted to clinching, headbutts, holding and slowing down opponents punch rate as a means of survival at that point. Both fights against Dawson showed that. Hell, the Wright fight showed where Hopkins was in his career.

But if how you judge a fighter is based off how well they did after losing to {insert predetermined fighter}, then:

Dirrel - went on to become the first to defeat Abraham who reigned supreme at MW for many years.

Taylor - Beat Jeff Lacy who's only loss was to Calzaghe. Also went on to win the IBF after losing to Froch

Groves - Won the WBA and beat Chris Eubank Jr after losing to Froch.

Pascal - Won the WBC x2 and the WBA while defeating Jack, Browne, Dawson and Diaconu to name a few. All the while becoming Lineal Champ, which is your favorite.

Remind me what Lacy, Woodhall, Eubank and Brewer did after losing to Joe?

Woodhall - Retired right after Calzaghe loss

Reid - Not a thing

Brewer - lol

Lacy - lol

Eubank - Ended up losing back to back fights and then retiring after losing to Joe

Again, what's your standard??? Make up you mind and stick to it.

And as far as your elite win, what did Kessler do after losing to Joe outside of splitting with Froch?

Froch was never even the real WBA champ, Ward was the super champion. Joe held the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO, Ring and lineal titles during his career. Froch only held the WBC x2 and IBF, and then the WBA regular belt.

This is a silly point because as I've already told you, even Carlos Baldomir was the lineal champ. It's even sillier when we consider based off your own criteria, Joe Calzaghe didn't have an "elite" win until his 14 and 15 year of boxing.... Oh and get this, one of those elite wins came as a SD against a 43 year old Hopkins who was already beaten twice by Taylor.

So you’re trying to downplay an undefeated Kessler but big up an undefeated Bute? WTF man.����

No, I'm asking you to explain to me why Kessler was so elite; something I'm still waiting on you to do.

If I had to pick, Froch's win over Bute was more like Joe's win over Lacy.

If Kessler isn’t HOF’er how is Froch??? When they fought in their primes KESSLER BEAT HIM. Kessler literally proved he was BETTER than Froch.

Lol now you're saying Kessler was prime??

Secondly, you don't understand the difference between head to head and greater.

Oh and just because Kessler retired after he lost to Froch doesn't mean Kessler was over the hill. Froch retired after Groves and Ward retired after Kovalev. Were they over the hill? They were coming off their biggest wins yet chose to retire. Retirement doesn't alway mean shot to schit.

This is completely DELUSIONAL. Did you really have to get your computer out to come up with this kind of nonsense?

Relax dude, I'm just getting warmed up; meanwhile you're falling a part lol

The evidence is all there, when the truth is staring you in the face some people choose to smash the mirror

I agree the evidence is there, which is why it makes sense for you to refuse to set the standard and change the goal posts.

This is firmly my last response as I’m just gonna put this clown on ignore.

Seriously man I wouldn’t bother quoting this as you won’t get a response and I’m not going to read anymore of your bias nonsense.

So why are you quoting me again about a subject you tucked your tail in and ran from me for? Especially when you said I was on ignore and you would never do it?

Or was that your way of admitting defeat and a cop out to run away and duck?

[BillyBoxing]

I'm not sure who would've won between the 2, but I do know that Froch showed heart that Calzaghe didn't. Froch was willing to face all of the best fighters of his era. Calzaghe on the other hand played avoidance games until he felt safer being that his main competition was over 40 and on clear decline.

Hopkins was the lineal champ at 175 just had schooled Wright and Tarver just before the Calslappy fight and went to school Pavlik and Pascal after that loss to Joe.
Hopkins still was a world beater as a matter of a fact.

Calzaghe held the ring mag in 2 divisions, 168 and 175 and rightfully so (just like Ward).

Not have been the best 168 and 175 of history but still very good accomplishments.

If you check, not a lot of fighters have held lineal titles in 2 divisions in the last decades.
You don't end up with that kind of prizes, playing the "avoidance games".
After Nard schooled Winky and Tarver, people were not in rush to fight him.

Everybody in the boxing world sitting on Ward nuts, so I don't know why people are doubting Calzaghe.

Calzaghe best wins Eubank, Hopkins, undefeated Kessler, Reid, Lacy are AT LEAST as good as Ward's best wins, Kova, Froch, Kessler, Dawson, Abraham.

It's fair to say that Froch who went life and death in most of his big fights, Kessler twice, Taylor, Direll, Pascal would have been quite over his head with Calzaghe, Froch could counter but def not as good as a vet Hopkins.

[thack]

I always thought that joe’s strengths were his punch output and his stamina. I never saw him as particularly slick. And without a doubt he came along at a time where there were no great middleweights other super middleweights in their prime. I just can’t see him beating Hopkins and jones in their primes and a fight with the great Nigel Benn May have proven downright fatal for him.

I was a 'dark destroyer fan' but he himself said he never would have gone anywhere near Joe!

[Oldskoolg]

This has been a real
Boxing fan’s thread....there are times when boxingscene’s comment section scrubs up well....this was one of them

[thack]

What's interesting is Joe is 6 years older than Froch and been retired for 11 years Ward is 6 years younger than Froch and is seen as semi retired but a lot think he will fight again...BUT you don't hear Froch calling him out as it just might happen!!!

[Tatabanya]

Thirty years from now, and a decrepit Froch will be seen shouting and gesturing at Joe Calzaghe's grave.