The Froch legacy

Simple question, were Froch to beat Kessler in the May 25th rematch at the O2 Arena, would his resume overtake Zaghe's?


Thoughts?

No.................Calzaghe was the main man at his weight......never lost and was champion for ever..

Froch with losses to the ordinary Dane and a boxing lesson off Ward can forget ever surpassing him..

Not for me it wouldn’t. One of the problems for Carl is even if he beats Kessler, and I believe he will, he will still not be the top man in his division and in these days of fragmented belts this is something I put a good deal of stock in. Whilst Joe’s level of opposition and career path have been debated ad nauseum but what cannot be argued is when he beat Kessler he was without any argument the top man at 168.

Add into that him beating the Ring Magazine champion at 175 and for me he will still trump Froch.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:No.................Calzaghe was the main man at his weight......never lost and was champion for ever..

Froch with losses to the ordinary Dane and a boxing lesson off Ward can forget ever surpassing him..

So Calzaghe's best win at the weight was against an ordinary fighter?

What????????

'What????????'


Trussman tying himself into knots as usual.

If Froch was operating against the opponents that Calzaghe faced he would easily be the man too....up until he faced Kessler that is, and even then Joe had the Dane come to his backyard. Froch when on his travels to face Kessler in his own country.

Say what you want about Joes exploits at 175, but Hopkins days as an elite fighter were well over. He has been beaten by guys with great skills, Calzaghe, Dawson, Taylor.....He won his recent belts against average sluggers so that victory for Calzaghe and the joke of a fight against Roy Jones were nonsense.

If he had of had the nuts, he would have fought them 10 years prior.

I think the Kessler factor is the only thing that can be marked against Froch because Calzaghe's main competitor was Jones Jr and he didnt take it.

Froch took his main competitor in Ward and fell short. He gets points for that.

Who said the Dane was Calzaghe's best win..Dumbass

No, unfortunately. Though very close indeed.

JC had about 3 top-level fights (Hoppo, Kessler, Lacey) however of those three it is Froch's loss to Kessler that harms him most. Simple fact is Calzaghe beat a better version than that which beat Carl, which is hugely significant even if Carl avenges.

I don't hold the 'not the man' and 'schooled by Ward' points against him as, simply put, JC never fought anyone anywhere near as good as Ward and never occupied the same division as anyone half as good has him either. Ward is a younger, stronger, fitter, faster, more powerful version of Hoppo - who Calzaghe struggled against. Therefore 8 times out of 10 I'd back Ward to have beaten him too (though JC's workrate would make it more competitive than Carl everytime).

I also think 'never lost' 'champion forever' 'longevity' etc are pretty naff arguments considering the absolute dross his career was built on.

Unless Froch can ever beat Ward, then comparing his record / legacy to Calzaghe's is a bit of a pointless exercise, for me. Carl will narrow the gap a little if he can beat Kessler next month, and the closer the fight gets the more convinced I am that he will, but Calzaghe handily beat a young, undefeated Kessler already six years ago. If Froch wins, he doesn't really gain anything with Joe doesn't already have to boast.

It took him a while to put the rubber stamp on it, but Calzaghe did become the absolute king of the Super-Middleweight division. It's unclear right now if Froch is the divisional number two or three, but one thing which is very clear is that Ward is number one. If you want to slice 'legacy' in to different aspects then Froch does have the advantage over Calzaghe in certain areas (ambition, level of opposition of a frquent and consistent basis, rather than a sporadic one etc), but when you take everything in to considertion Calzaghe's career has just been more successful with more dominance over his contemporaries than Froch's so far.

Exactly TopHat, well said!

Froch hasn't the time to catch up.............

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:If Froch was operating against the opponents that Calzaghe faced he would easily be the man too....up until he faced Kessler that is, and even then Joe had the Dane come to his backyard. Froch when on his travels to face Kessler in his own country.

Say what you want about Joes exploits at 175, but Hopkins days as an elite fighter were well over. He has been beaten by guys with great skills, Calzaghe, Dawson, Taylor.....He won his recent belts against average sluggers so that victory for Calzaghe and the joke of a fight against Roy Jones were nonsense.

If he had of had the nuts, he would have fought them 10 years prior.

I think the Kessler factor is the only thing that can be marked against Froch because Calzaghe's main competitor was Jones Jr and he didnt take it.

Froch took his main competitor in Ward and fell short. He gets points for that.

10 yrs prior Hoppo was a MW and going nowhere, can't expect Calzaghe to move down. And as JC started his title reign RJJ was hitting the heights at LHW, so again I don't think it's reasonable to expect such a young/new champ to immediately jump up a weight for a greater challenge.

If he had the nuts..............

I'm afraid he had Warren.........

No, Froch can never overtake Calzaghe unless he beats Ward fair and square with no suggestion that Ward is past it, eyes on other things, weight drained or any other argument that can be made. I like Froch and enjoy watching his fights more than I did Calzaghe. I also believe that Calzaghe's reputation was built on sub world-standard fighters. But there is no doubting his ability and the fact that, when tested, by Lacy, Kessler and even Hopkins, he came through.

I think their records are pretty similar with regards the b level opponents. Calzaghe fought his throughout his career but the majority, I feel, more than match up to the fighters Froch has fought in his last 8. For every Dirrell, Abraham, Pascal and Taylor you have Eubank, Reid, Brewer, Mitchell and such like. I've always felt that Froch's opponents are massively overrated when measuring against Calzaghes.
Put simply, Froch doesn't have a win like an unbeaten Kessler or Hopkins and he wouldn't have beaten either when Calzaghe fought them. Even if he beats Kessler, he's already lost to him.
Froch has fought and lost against the best he's fought. Calzaghe didn't so I can't really see a case for Froch ever being above as only beating Ward would do that and that wont happen.

Ward apart...............I think Eubank beats everybody Froch's fought........

Come on Truss. Calzaghe beat a shadow of the Real Eubank. Had he fought Eubank around the Watson era, then Eubank would have wiped the floor with him.

for all the frustrations about jc's reign, i can't see froch getting close unless he avenges both kessler and ward. For a nottingham boy, chris' assessment is pretty balanced, and how i see it.

Im not sure why Froch is suddenly a better fighter than Kessler if he wins ? Surely that just makes it one all with both fighters winning on home ground.
Maybe if he wipes the floor with him he can be seen as the better of the two fighters but whats far more likely is he edges a close fight...meaning a third fight on neutral territory is needed surely.

i think they are about even if froch beats kessler convincingly.

it shouldn't count against froch that he has continuously been in against the best, ward is his only definite loss, kessler was close and a rematch victory would for me put froch ahead of the dane.

Calzaghe always beats Eubank..

Even???......Froch has lost twice, hasn't been champ for ten years and doesn't have a win as good as Lacy and Hoppo....

Apart from that...

Id compare Bute to Lacy TRUSS. Both were undefeated and were expected to do a job on both Froch and Calzaghe. Difference is that Bute was a World Champ and had been for some time to be honest (all be it he was un-tested). I think your right with Hoppo though, especially considering that since Calzghe, he went on to practically end Pavlik, beat and out smarted Pascal (twice in my eyes) and has now beaten Cloud.

Lacy was also a world champ.

Bute to Lacey???????????????????????

Dear oh dear..

Why not though Truss?

Who was jeff Lacy before he fought Calzaghe? An undefeated "world champion" (IBF) that had beaten the likes of Robin Reid and Omar Sheika?

Bute had was also undefeated and a "world" Champion having got through G.Johnson, Bika, McGee, Andrade.

Opponents prior to Calzaghe/Froch were similar in my opinion.

Jeff Lacy never did anything out of the ordinary in comparison to Bute.

If i remember correctly, lacy was supposed to be a huge power puncher yet it took him to round9 i think to KO Sheika in 2004, yet Calzage stopped him in 5 rounds 4 years earlier!!

Id compare Lacy and Bute all day long. Especially considering Bute reigned longer as a world champ, had fought decent opposition and is now set to take on a former light heavy champ in Pascal.

What happened to Lacy after Calzaghe??

Lacy was a nobody when he fought Joe.

Bute is a stand up chinless wonder.................

How old was Glen Johnson???/

Jeff Lacy was a technical disaster.....................

Glenn Johnson was an old oak tree when fighting Bute, but he had only fought Froch 6 months prior in the Super Six.

Nobody had given Froch grief for that fight as Johnson had been in with top quality opposition.

How often did you see Lacy in with a fighter of his calibre?

Peter Manfredo Jr????

Robin Reid alone.......Is better than anything Bute beat...........Who was Bute stopped from losing to... by that bent referee again...

How old was Johnson again??

Bute is a better win for me as things are now. If Bute goes on to be as exposed as Lacy was then Il reconsider but Lacys career post Calzaghe was shocking and it wasn’t all that great before Calzaghe either. Bute had the better title reign for me.

Rosario was exposed after he took a severe beating of Chavez...nonsensical argument...

Lacy was finished after Calzaghe took a hiding..

More highly rated than Bute though..and always will be..

Stiff with no chin..

I dont think he will be Truss. I never heard of Lacy before he fought Joe, yet id heard of Bute as did most boxing fans.

More good fighters around in Lacy's time....

Lacy was a big fish...overrated but becoming a big name.

mobilemaster8 wrote:Jeff Lacy was a technical disaster.....................

Glenn Johnson was an old oak tree when fighting Bute, but he had only fought Froch 6 months prior in the Super Six.

Nobody had given Froch grief for that fight as Johnson had been in with top quality opposition.

How often did you see Lacy in with a fighter of his calibre?

Peter Manfredo Jr????

give up mm8. You'll never get Truss to agree that his precious fellow Yank hype-job was anything but great, no matter how much sense you make.

Never said Lacy was great..........

To be honest, I'm not even sure that Lacy was more highly rated in 2006 than Bute was in 2012, never mind predicting that he'll always be held in higher regard.

This idea that Lacy was a really heavy favourite going in to the Calzaghe fight is a bit of a myth, to be honest, one which has grown in time whenever people look back at the hammering Calzaghe gave him. Just about everything that I've seen (newspaper reports of the fight afterwards, the predictions of current fighters / trainers beforehand, the odds being offered in the bookies in the build up etc) suggest that the odds were considered virtually even, and if Lacy was a betting favourite it was only by a slither.

On the flip side, Froch really was considered a pretty outside bet against Bute, which is nice and fresh in the memory.

Right now, Bute stands as a better win for me. Certainly a more rounded boxer than Lacy and I'd say his reign as IBF champion was better than Lacy's overall. Obviously, what Bute does from now on will help to decide which win is better in the long run, but right now I'd side with Froch's.

Whenever I think of Calzaghe's best career wins, I think to Kessler and Hopkins, not Lacy.

The fact he was even in the betting...kind of dispels your whole argument..that Lacey wasn't highly rated..

Calzaghe was..

Its frustrating though TH24/7 because i have openly agreed with the Hopkins scenario, but clearly, in my mind, Bute is a hell of a lot better and more known than Lacy ever was!

Better???...........Watch Slobodan Kacar....and then come back.

When the concensus view is from Chris and Manos, I am more than happy to go along with it..!

Always struck me as the "Follower" type...

Not denying that Lacy was rated, Truss. Just arguing that Bute was too and it's impossible to say that Lacy will always be rated higher than Bute, as you suggest. Bute may yet come back to reclaim a title at Super-Middle or Light-Heavy for all we know (I have my doubts, but you can't totally write him off just yet).

The Calzaghe of 2006 wasn't really any more proven than a 2012 Froch, for me. I'm pretty sure that Carl could have reigned unbeaten for eight years had he been mixing it with the Pudwills, Staries, Sheikas and Mitchells of this world and, up until that point, the names on Calzaghe's ledger probably didn't read as well as Froch's before he fought Bute. To that end, the fact that Lacy was only a very marginal favourite, and Bute was a pretty heavy one, tells me that Bute may have been the more highly-touted of the pair.

Not a lot in it, but I'd still feel comfortable saying that Froch's win over Bute carries a wee bit more weight than Joe's over Lacy.

Bute/Slobodan...............

Could have reigned isn't the same as doing it...

I'd be comfortable disagreeing............Bute's never beaten anybody and his failings are there for all to see...unlike Lacey's were...

Lacey was finished after one beating...

This is fantastic lads, Truss getting seriously owned.

Lacy being better than Bute is up there with D4's claim that plaster wraps in gloves would save lives.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:This is fantastic lads, Truss getting seriously owned.

Lacy being better than Bute is up there with D4's claim that plaster wraps in gloves would save lives.

- Must have missed that. Please explain!

It was a classic of the 606 old days. From memory, something along the lines of leading to quicker ko's and therefore less overall/sustained damage.

Ask Superfly nicely the next time he is around he will send you the link to the original thread.

truss, let me remind you bute is yet to lose to anybody else other than froch, if he beats pascal you still going to say lacy is the better of the two?

Bute beat Bika and Andrade twice and even a past it Glen Johnson and Edison Miranda are better than anything on Lacy's record. A lot is made of the first Andrade fight being a robbery when it really wasn't. Bute was knocked down with 4 seconds left but he did beat the count and was up at what should have been 8 or 9. The ref was trying to help him no doubt by shouting at Andrade for no reason but Bute did beat the count and there was no time left for Andrade to finish him. Add to that his longevity which is something Lacy doesn't have and he's easily a better win.

He was saved by the bell against Andrade. People are judging lacy post jc. As wins stand, at the time it was a major triumph for jc against the next big thing. No greater or lesser win than froch's over bute.

The fact that a lot of people had bute strong favourite against froch just shows how little research some bookies do and how little some of you know about boxing