Originally posted by RJJ-94-02=GOAT
View Post
What ATG's is he comparable to? For me he is a proper throwback, I feel he would have excelled in the era of the Ketchell's and Battling Nelson, when it was about attrition and not such a sprint. Those guys were iron chinned, iron willed, greats who maybe didn't have elite skills.
The fights in those days went 30 sometimes 40+ rounds, and I honestly feel Froch would have been better served in those era's, or the 15 round era, but I still think he was a great fighter in this era. A modern comparison someone has already mentioned, Vitali Klitschko, who wasn't the most technically sound fighter, even a tad clumsy like Froch, but boy could he fight. There chin and toughness allowed them to get away with things other fighters could not.
Froch has a much better resume than Vitali too.
Maybe your problem isn't with Froch, but the standards of IBHOF. Because Froch did more than quite a few guys in there.
Your whole narrative comes across with an undertone of subjective bias. Your opinion on his opponents, certainly wasn't the opinion at the time, and even in hindsight you are massively underrating some of those fighters and where they were when Froch fought them. I am not over the top high on Froch, I just know what I see, and can call a spade a spade. You say Taylor got 2 gifts against Hopkins? Lots of people would disagree with you, there were several rounds in both fights when Hopkins did nothing and let Taylor steal rounds with the double jab. The fights were close, and B-Hop was still prime, which makes them pretty special in terms of performance.
Winky as well - when Taylor fought him he was like top 3 p4p and hadn't lost a fight in over 5 years, including massive domination of Trinidad a year before.
Taylor had a weakness around stamina though and that was exposed by Pavlik, Froch, and later Abraham. I do think those Pavlik losses took the edge off him, but to say he was WAY past prime, is quite frankly idiotic. He was 30 when he fought Froch, 30! Taylor earned a mandatory position, and after having to go to war with Pascal for the belt Froch went to the US to defend against Taylor, gets put down, behind on the cards and comes back and breaks him. I don't think Taylor's performance was of a fighter who was WAY past his prime, Froch exposed a flaw that was always there.
In general you are underrating Froch's resume, the super 6 fighters and the rest of the field. You are also spinning it where it suits your argument, for example ignoring the fact that the first Kessler fight was a seriously close fight which split public opinion about who won.
Ward would not have been over his head against Jones. I would pick Jones by UD in that fight, but Ward for sure would have his moments and would win rounds. I could see it being similar to Hopkins-Jones I. Lots of people also have Ward down as an ATG. I don't think there is a SMW or LHW era that he would not have been near or at the top.
I don't care about Sky Sports or British media when it comes to fighters to be honest, so am not sure why you are bringing that up. If anything - he earned the respect and popularity of the US media, boxing fraternity, and US audiences first, he was shunned for a long time in the UK, and it took a while for his UK popularity to catch up.
I don't know if you follow Stephen "Breadman" Edwards scribe on here, he is a trainer and brilliant boxing mind, I dug up a question he was asked this year about comparing Froch and Calzaghe's career, and I feel the similarly about Froch's career. (PS he is an American)
Bread’s Response: Froch had a tremendous career and his late career runs puts him in the HOF in my opinion. But Calzaghe’s career was better. I think Froch is a great fighter and a HOF. Calzaghe is a great fighter who is teetering on all time status. I think Calazaghe is just below the all time status and no worse than the 3rd or 4th best super middleweight ever.
Calazghe threw punches away just like Loma and Pacquiao does. All of Calzaghe’s punches were not hard but they were designed that way. He used them to blind you and while you were blinded he moved his feet. By the time you refocus on him he’s in another spot. Calzaghe is not as smooth or visually pleasing as Loma but he was just as effective.
Carl Froch had a way of punching into you. His punches looked slow and he ran into you at times. You would think he could be easily defended or countered but he was only beaten cleanly one time in his career vs a great in Andre Ward. He ****ed his punches back but he didn’t release them until the right time. Froch was able to hit everybody at some point in the fight. He had uncanny timing on his delivery despite poor technique at times. Froch was no joke. He also had indomitable will.
Comment