Calzaghe or Froch

[IronDanHamza]

Froch for me.

[NChristo]

Like Scott said, Froch has the better resume and Calzaghe the better boxer.

[Willy Wanker]

Froch has a better resume.

I think Calzaghe would have frustrated Froch if they ever fought though.

[ShoulderRoll]

Froch does have the better resume but I think Calzaghe would have soundly outpointed him had they fought.

Look how easily Joe handled a prime Kessler as opposed to the difficulties Froch had with the older version.

[billeau2]

Sorry I don't think he as a better resume. Joe is no cherry picker either.
He cherry picked Jeff Lacey?

Joe was very smart about who he chose to fight and when. He deserves credit for seeing the truth about lacy. Perhaps in a perfect world that would make Lacy a great victory. Unfortunately we live in the real world and all the intelligence of knowing an easy mark in Lacy is just that. Lacy proved that after the Calzighe fight as well. So, while lacy was, in a sense, a very smart cherry pick.

Oh and regarding the subject of the thread...virtually everyone has said it and i agree, better resume Froch, better fighter Calzighe. I always found Froch very ordinary.

[Humean]

Froch's resume certainly has the higher quality of losses . . .

[Anthony342]

Joe was very smart about who he chose to fight and when. He deserves credit for seeing the truth about lacy. Perhaps in a perfect world that would make Lacy a great victory. Unfortunately we live in the real world and all the intelligence of knowing an easy mark in Lacy is just that. Lacy proved that after the Calzighe fight as well. So, while lacy was, in a sense, a very smart cherry pick.

Oh and regarding the subject of the thread...virtually everyone has said it and i agree, better resume Froch, better fighter Calzighe. I always found Froch very ordinary.

Then why did Calzaghe opt to retire before fighting Froch? Was there a fear of him getting caught with a good shot and losing his 0?

[Scott9945]

Then why did Calzaghe opt to retire before fighting Froch? Was there a fear of him getting caught with a good shot and losing his 0?

They were in different weight divisions when Calzaghe retired. Froch never did move up so I can't assume he would have then.

[The Old LefHook]

Almost everyone goes with Calzaghe. Joel was a true under acheiver, Froch an over acheiver. You have to love Froch's attitude and courage and snicker at Calzaghe's. I think Calzaghe would have always whipped Hopkins and could only whip Jones once Roy was well gone and whiskered. But if he could have plucked up his courage, he might have given Jones real problems and possibly even decisioned him. Jones was not going after him, but he was not going after Jones, either. They both had their little belt thing going, loaded up with trinkets, and they were interested in nothing that might upset their respective hayrides. Being half a real division apart is a poor excuse for not fighting.

Calzaghe had a mean attitude in the ring for a slickster. He loved to pummel. If you had a boxer with Calzaghe's talent and Froch's fighting heart and punch, you would really have something--like possibly the greatest fighter ever.

[robertzimmerman]

Almost everyone goes with Calzaghe. Joel was a true under acheiver, Froch an over acheiver. You have to love Froch's attitude and courage and snicker at Calzaghe's. I think Calzaghe would have always whipped Hopkins and could only whip Jones once Roy was well gone and whiskered. But if he could have plucked up his courage, he might have given Jones real problems and possibly even decisioned him. Jones was not going after him, but he was not going after Jones, either. They both had their little belt thing going, loaded up with trinkets, and they were interested in nothing that might upset their respective hayrides. Being half a real division apart is a poor excuse for not fighting.

Calzaghe had a mean attitude in the ring for a slickster. He loved to pummel. If you had a boxer with Calzaghe's talent and Froch's fighting heart and punch, you would really have something--like possibly the greatest fighter ever.

Joe was a great fighter. But don't compare his career with Roy's.

Joe has repeatedly bragged about his number of WBO defences throughout the years, which tells you all you need to know about how ambitious he was.

He would never have fought a prime Roy.

He said in 99, that he wasn't chasing Roy and that he didn't want tough fights.

He also said in 03, that he thought he could give Roy his greatest fight, but he'd have wanted 'The Crown ***els' to face him, due to the element of risk involved.

Now that second quote is fair enough, apart from the fact that nobody would have given Joe huge money to fight Roy at that point, because as great as Joe was, he was relatively unknown outside of Europe at that point.

Of course Roy never went after him. Why would the world's best fighter and unified LHW champ go after a relatively unknown, WBO belt holder from the division below?

Back on topic, Joe was obviously a level higher than Carl. And I'm sure he'd have won had they fought. But I don't think it would have been as easy as what some people have claimed. Because both guys have huge egos and I'm sure they'd have had a heated build up. Which could have resulted in a macho tear up in the centre of the ring. A cool, composed version of Joe is too much. But the version who had a reckless shootout with the likes of Byron Mitchell could possibly have come unstuck at some point. But I think Joe would have prevailed in the end.

If Joe had possessed the will that Carl had, then he could have been a superstar.