Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Enzo Calzaghe: Carl Froch is Not a Great Fighter

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    #31
    Calzaghe would beat Froch in a pretty wide decision, but in terms of resume Froch has Calzaghe beat.

    Calzaghe was a special fighter who didn't take risky fights until late in his career.

    Froch is an excellent fighter who took on the best.

    In terms of legacy, they are probably even, but Froch can have Calzaghe beat if he manages to get revenge against Kessler and put up a better fight against Ward.

    Comment

      #32
      Also, Calzaghe have more qualities. More than just toughness, heart that Froch is best known for. Joe can box / fight inside / possess quickness / speed / heart / work rate / stamina / decent punch or slaps / good rhythm. Froch only have a few of those qualities.

      Comment

        #33
        Froch slow ass would get shut out by a true great in Calslappy. C'mon, fool got beat by Kessler whom Calzaghe beat decisively when Kessler was still undefeated.

        Comment

          #34
          Froch's far from great when 1 looks @ howmany more rungs on the ladder he needs 2 climb when watching him v Ward....can't c him even going the distance w/guys like Bob Foster, Mike Spinks, Matt Franklin, even Alvaro Lopez, Victor Galendez...Rossman(diPiano) would've gave him a run...

          Comment

            #35
            Froch completely dominated by both Ward and Dirrell (before he brokedown mentally) shows you where he's at as a boxer.... Very good, just not GREAT. Man, some of ya'll don't know **** about boxing. It ain't about who gives the most entertaining fights or shown the most heart.. And btw Arturo Gatti wasn't GREAT neither. C level at best.

            Comment

              #36
              Originally posted by fladz View Post
              Say what you want but he's faced a string of opponents that Joe Calzaghe could only dream of. No idea what purpose is served by Enzo coming out with this, I'd have kept my mouth shut if I were him.
              Say what you want but JOE played with a undeafeted KESSLER,other way FROCH lost a life and death fight vs a older and with two losses KESSLER;FROCH has to thank GOD that the fight with DIRRELL was in ENGLAND because that fight was a victory for DIRRELL.BHOP at 46y can beat FROCH easy but he couldn't beat 5 years before a skilled boxer like CALZAGHE !

              Comment

                #37
                People can talk about Froch's resume all they want but the fact is he lost to the two best guys on it no matter how you try and sugarcoat it. Joe beat a prime Kessler while Carl lost to a faded one even if Froch goes on to beat Kessler in a rematch we all know that he's over the hill.

                I like Carl but beating a blown up MW in Abraham and an overrated Bute doesn't make you one of the greats. Personally I think Pascal is his best win to date. Having said that with the skill set that Froch actually has he's one of the greatest over achievers in the sport and deserves alot of respect.

                Comment

                  #38
                  Originally posted by Neutral View Post
                  im american and i too notice that, i think those people are utterly disgusting. only hate on him because of his 0 and the fact that he took Jones and Hopkin's soul
                  Easily one of the dumbest statements i've ever read on this site

                  Comment

                    #39
                    The thing with calzaghe is he didn't fight Hopkins and Roy during their primes, or Roy and Hopkins didn't fight calzaghe in their primes.

                    The Hopkins fight was actually set up at one point but Hopkins suddenly changed his pay request from three to ten million pounds, and got laughed out of the room.

                    See, Hopkins and Jones had no real interest in fighting joe, as he didn't bring money or a name, likewise joe had no interest in leaving the UK to fight for peanuts.

                    The fights took place near the end of Joes career because it was only at that point that joe had beaten Lacy and Kessler and become known.

                    People **** on joe but at the time Lacy was actually very highly regarded and considered a dangerous man (go back and check the threads if you don't believe me) and Kessler as well was unbeaten and a big risk.

                    So to say joe took no risks is harsh imo

                    People give him **** for not fighting Glen Johnson but he fought bika who's a similar challenge so that's kind of dumb

                    Anyway there's no point typing all this as I said Americans hate joe because he never lost to one of them

                    The hatred is so deep that you have posters like daggum spending hundreds of hours online trying to discredit him, which is really pathetic

                    End of
                    Last edited by Earl-Hickey; 11-07-2012, 08:01 AM.

                    Comment

                      #40
                      Neither is your son, Enzo.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP