Frochy beats Kessler.. better resume than Joe (NO ARGUMENTS)

[Counter-puncher]

A general question now. I'm just a fan and have no direct involvement with the boxing I'm sorry to say, I know a little bit about the sport and dabbled a when I was younger. Anyway I point this out to illustrate that I don't have any inside knowledge as such and accordingly have to ask, is Calzaghe a bit disliked within the boxing community?

i wouldn't necessarily identify some of the cliques etc on this forum (or any other)as representative of the 'boxing community', some may like to think that they 'are' the boxing community and would have you believe it (you can tell who they are, they use phrases like 'the majority of serious boxing fans think...' ;;-) ) but it ain't necessarily so. I M O

[Exoddus]

There were times in the fight where Peter Manfredo Jr was giving Lacy a boxing lesson! Lmfao. He couldn't have degraded that much since the Calzaghe fight.

Calzaghe's record is nothing to brag about. Jeff Lacy is crap, Chris Eubank was finished, Kessler was a good win, I thought he lost to Bernard Hopkins who was 43? Roy Jones Jr was a waste of time because he was finished. As Calzaghe himself said in his book before he faught him, but he still put Calzaghe down.

Calzaghe was a very good boxer. Don't get me wrong. He just isn't an ATG.

I think Froch would beat Calzaghe. He would just walk through his punches. Joe would try and have to box his way to a points victory. Calzaghe got put down by two old men. Froch is younger and more powerful than what Roy Jones and B-Hop were when they faught Calzaghe.

[superpunchout]

A general question now. I'm just a fan and have no direct involvement with the boxing I'm sorry to say, I know a little bit about the sport and dabbled a when I was younger. Anyway I point this out to illustrate that I don't have any inside knowledge as such and accordingly have to ask, is Calzaghe a bit disliked within the boxing community?

i wouldn't necessarily identify some of the cliques etc on this forum (or any other)as representative of the 'boxing community', some may like to think that they 'are' the boxing community and would have you believe it (you can tell who they are, they use phrases like 'the majority of serious boxing fans think...' ;;-) ) but it ain't necessarily so. I M O

I sort of assumed it was a hub of experts, I recognized a few names before I joined - Ian McNeily and Ant Evans but to name a couple, I'm pretty sure that both write for Boxing Monthy. I also noticed that Tony Dodson has posted from time to time as well.
It's a big place though and on balance I guess for every authoritative figure, there's bound to be dozens of keyboard warriors like me doing the rounds lol.

[observer1]

There were times in the fight where Peter Manfredo Jr was giving Lacy a boxing lesson! Lmfao. He couldn't have degraded that much since the Calzaghe fight.

Calzaghe's record is nothing to brag about. Jeff Lacy is crap, Chris Eubank was finished, Kessler was a good win, I thought he lost to Bernard Hopkins who was 43? Roy Jones Jr was a waste of time because he was finished. As Calzaghe himself said in his book before he faught him, but he still put Calzaghe down.

Calzaghe was a very good boxer. Don't get me wrong. He just isn't an ATG.

I think Froch would beat Calzaghe. He would just walk through his punches. Joe would try and have to box his way to a points victory. Calzaghe got put down by two old men. Froch is younger and more powerful than what Roy Jones and B-Hop were when they faught Calzaghe.

Well said. But you're probably going to be called a "Hater" or something stupid for saying it how it is.

[Counter-puncher]

A general question now. I'm just a fan and have no direct involvement with the boxing I'm sorry to say, I know a little bit about the sport and dabbled a when I was younger. Anyway I point this out to illustrate that I don't have any inside knowledge as such and accordingly have to ask, is Calzaghe a bit disliked within the boxing community?

i wouldn't necessarily identify some of the cliques etc on this forum (or any other)as representative of the 'boxing community', some may like to think that they 'are' the boxing community and would have you believe it (you can tell who they are, they use phrases like 'the majority of serious boxing fans think...' ;;-) ) but it ain't necessarily so. I M O

I sort of assumed it was a hub of experts, I recognized a few names before I joined - Ian McNeily and Ant Evans but to name a couple, I'm pretty sure that both write for Boxing Monthy. I also noticed that Tony Dodson has posted from time to time as well.
It's a big place though and on balance I guess for every authoritative figure, there's bound to be dozens of keyboard warriors like me doing the rounds lol.

[BundiniBrown.]

A general question now. I'm just a fan and have no direct involvement with the boxing I'm sorry to say, I know a little bit about the sport and dabbled a when I was younger. Anyway I point this out to illustrate that I don't have any inside knowledge as such and accordingly have to ask, is Calzaghe a bit disliked within the boxing community?

i wouldn't necessarily identify some of the cliques etc on this forum (or any other)as representative of the 'boxing community', some may like to think that they 'are' the boxing community and would have you believe it (you can tell who they are, they use phrases like 'the majority of serious boxing fans think...' ;;-) ) but it ain't necessarily so. I M O

I sort of assumed it was a hub of experts, I recognized a few names before I joined - Ian McNeily and Ant Evans but to name a couple, I'm pretty sure that both write for Boxing Monthy. I also noticed that Tony Dodson has posted from time to time as well.
It's a big place though and on balance I guess for every authoritative figure, there's bound to be dozens of keyboard warriors like me doing the rounds lol.

Yes it is a hub of experts, you get fighters, trainers on here as well as posters that give expert analysis on fighters and fights like me.........there are plenty of noobs on the boxing forums too, but everyone gets their say, it's the journalists and wannabee internet "experts" you need to stay away from in general as they usually have agendas and fawn over (
Fawn over (DEFINITION; To Praise someone in an excessive way to get their favour or something from them
Example:
She FAWNED OVER the inspectors in the hope that they would give her a good grade.
Notes:
- Inseparable
- International English
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Other Phrasal Verbs

We have 2 phrasal verbs with 'FAWN'

- Fawn on
- Fawn over)


the first boxer that gives them the time or day or lives down the road from them.

From what i have read so far on here Ant Evans aint bad though.

[superpunchout]

Yes it is a hub of experts, you get fighters, trainers on here as well as posters that give expert analysis on fighters and fights like me.........there are plenty of noobs on the boxing forums too, but everyone gets their say, it's the journalists and wannabee internet "experts" you need to stay away from in general as they usually have agendas and fawn over (
Fawn over (DEFINITION; To Praise someone in an excessive way to get their favour or something from them
Example:
She FAWNED OVER the inspectors in the hope that they would give her a good grade.
Notes:
- Inseparable
- International English
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Other Phrasal Verbs

We have 2 phrasal verbs with 'FAWN'

- Fawn on
- Fawn over)


the first boxer that gives them the time or day or lives down the road from them.

From what i have read so far on here Ant Evans aint bad though.

Well thank you for going to such great lengths to extend my vocabulary by one word and also outlining the hazards of agenda based opinions. In future I shall duely ignore the contents of any post that seems even remotely uncivil or tainted by bias.

[Counter-puncher]

Well thank you for going to such great lengths to extend my vocabulary by one word and also outlining the hazards of agenda based opinions. In future I shall duely ignore the contents of any post that seems even remotely uncivil or tainted by bias.

i like your style SPO, you'll do

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

There were times in the fight where Peter Manfredo Jr was giving Lacy a boxing lesson! Lmfao. He couldn't have degraded that much since the Calzaghe fight..

Ever consider Calzaghe ruined Lacy? Lacy took round after round of punnishment, literally ate about 1000punches and watching it I was wishing they'd throw the towel in. Calzaghe's weaker punches made it worse because instead of just being ko'd and stopped Lacy was continously nearly ko'd and taking a worse and worse cummulative punnishment. Lacy was P4P top10 when Joe beat him and had wins over 4-5top10 SMWs, most picked him over Joe, people were picking him to beat LHWs like Tarver and even go all the way up to HW. Lacy had a huge buzz in the boxing world and it wasnt all hype. Now Lacy certainly wasn't all that before Joe beat him but he was allot better than after Joe goto him

[stujones]

How is Taylor more proven than Kessler, there is an argument (and a valid one) that he has only won one world title fight (against Ouma). Hopkins was clearly getting tight at the weight, even if you think Taylor won those fights. Lets not forget also he is now 0-2 at Super Middleweight.

Sure I think Taylor is good, and was clearly Carl's hardest ask to date and I tipped Jermain to win.... but looking at it senisbly, how is he more proven a super middleweight than Kessler.

I think Froch needs a bit more than Kessler to say he has a better resume than Joe.

[Counter-puncher]

Also, Taylor is 2-1 at SMW, or do you think he lost the Lacy fight by a StuJones special TKO in the 5th, have you erased the contest from history because Taylor won it?

?

he's 1-2 at 168 to my way of looking at it, losses to Froch and Pavlik win over Lacy.

how is taylor 2-1 at SMW?

[brian13]

Froch's record would be better than Calzaghe's if he beats one more high class champ Taylor was JC's Lacy

[Captain Hook]

I guess time will tell.

Personally I don't see what Kessler has done to be rated so highly, besides do well for a third of a fight against Calzaghe and I think Froch would do him.

People bring the Lacy fight up a lot but fail to realize just how SH*T Lacy actually is. That win meant nothing.

B-Hop beat Pavlik because Pavlik is painfully one dimensional. Old Roy would beat him too

If Lacy is shit then why are you making so much of a last-gasp victory by Froch over a guy who beat a faded Lacy last time out. Calzaghe destroyed Lacy and he has never been the same since.

Before those two met around 50% of this board had him to knock JC out...

lol, OK Lacy is a top ten pound for pounder.

Who said he was? Your argument is as weak as an anaemic sparrow...

[Captain Hook]

Froch would knock Joe out early. Calzaghe's chin is china these days, he got dropped by a Hopkins "Bruce Lee" punch which travelled like 3inches and then Jones rubbed his forearm on Joe and Welshy nearly went to sleep from that too. Both in first round, both from guys without real KO wins win years.

And Calzaghe CANNOT knock Froch down, it is impossible for a man who hit Lacy, Jones and the others with 1000 and more punches and them last the distance to expect to hurt Froch.

Maybe Joe could pitta-patter his way to point win, but I doubt it. Not now. Joe should stick to golf, safe in the knowledge there's plenty of idiots who don't know any better who will claim forever he is best UK fighter since Alfred the Great and blah blah

You're supposed to be learned on this subject pal. What a ridiculous post.

He is retired.....Froch is not the second coming of Ray Leonard.

I like him but had he not caught Taylor in the last round you'rd have been singing a very different tune, he'd have lost the fight and paid the price for looking like a startled rabbit for the first 4/5 rounds.

[Captain Hook]

And I'm no Calzaghe lover, I've criticised him often.....but he gets far too much shit on here.

He's retired, so why is he still brought up in every Froch thread. He's never coming back.

Let it go....Bute, Kessler, Pavlik - let's see how Carl does with them.

They're all winnable for him...

[big lennox]

I'm sorry.I just can't see Froch beating Kessler.In fact, I think there is a very good chance that Kessler knocks him out early doors. Apparantly, Froch wasn't hurt on Saturday night when he went down -it was a blance thing( his words, not mine). If kessler catches him with a straight right or right uppercut.He will go down and stay down -I am sure of that + Kessler won't be able to miss.He's the best of the bunch of them, make no mistake.

[stujones]

How is Taylor more proven than Kessler, there is an argument (and a valid one) that he has only won one world title fight (against Ouma). Hopkins was clearly getting tight at the weight, even if you think Taylor won those fights. Lets not forget also he is now 0-2 at Super Middleweight.

Sure I think Taylor is good, and was clearly Carl's hardest ask to date and I tipped Jermain to win.... but looking at it senisbly, how is he more proven a super middleweight than Kessler.

I think Froch needs a bit more than Kessler to say he has a better resume than Joe.

He is far more proven overall, surely you do not dispute that? Kessler has done very little since his lost to Joe, and people cannot keep coming up with this 'I had Taylor losing versus Hopkins, so he lost' nonsense. I had Ray Leonard losing to Hagler, but he still won the fight on the cards, you cannot wipe that one out of the books.

Also, Taylor is 2-1 at SMW, or do you think he lost the Lacy fight by a StuJones special TKO in the 5th, have you erased the contest from history because Taylor won it?

Overall, and despite the negative image of him, Taylor has two wins over Hopkins, hit Wright often in their draw, and held the undisputed middleweight title after handing an outstanding fighter two defeats, if Bazza and Nazza can make the HOF then there is no reason why Taylor should be left on the outside.

Appologies, the Lacy fight slipped my mind. Its infact possibly Taylor's best win, at least it was clear cut. Good win and a decent performance, it was that win that made me tip Taylor - so appologies for forgetting it. Yep he is 1-2 at Super Middleweight, now 0-2 in world class Super Middleweight fights. Kessler is 5-1 for me (I've taken out a few non world class title wins from his resume).

Off course you cannot wipe out the record books - but you can still argue if Leonard would have beaten a prime Hagler at Middleweight, if DLH would have beaten a prime Chavez, if Holmes would have beaten a prime Ali etc. Hopkins was clearly a weight drained fighter and his last few performances (including the DLH one) demonstrated. Winky hasn't looked the same fighter since the Taylor fight, Kasim Ouma hasn't set the world alight since they fought, and Cory Spinks lost to Verno Phillips.

And I'll repeat - how is he a more proven Super Middleweight than Kessler - how many top ten Super Middleweights has he beaten?

Manny Pacquiao is more proven than the lot of them - maybe that should be the next fight for Froch... maybe that will get him a better resume than Joe.

[fist]

Don't reckon it would happen. If Taylor was shown live on ITV and had a big build up over here. If loads of Brits saw the high drama. If it would be a massive fight guaranteed, then maybe.

I'd also pick Froch over Joe as he's an active fighter who's had a hard learning curve in the last 2 fights. Joe is easy to hit though his engine is impressive.

Was Joe willing to fight a pound for pounder / allaged Hall of Famer, in title defence #2?

Like fvck he was.

While Joe got international recognition, it's Froch who is more reminiscent of the real stars of British boxing, Benn and Eubank.

Was very pleased Froch won at the weekend, but he made mistake after mistake, and IMO would be taken apart by Calzaghe. I also think Taylor, who was the better boxer in all departments, would have a very good chance of winnig a rematch. As for Hopkins, who I despise as a fighter, I think he would make Froch look silly.

The positives are that he won the fight, a major achievement, and that surely it has to be a great learning experience.

The negatives are that many of his flaws got exposed. He is not talented enough to fight with his hands low - just not quick enough or smart enough to make opponents miss. He has got away with it over the years with poorer quality fighters.

Even with Joe's brittle hands he would destroy Froch with relentless attack, and if you look at Kessler and Lacy's faces after their fights with Joe, I think you would be looking at a similar result.

Irrelevant really, as Froch needs to concentrate on current fighters and he needs to make serious improvements. Hopkins accuracy when countering, even at his old age, would outclass Froch.

Don't want to be too critical here cos Froch pulled out a great result, but it has to be caveated with the fact he was outclassed for the majority of the fight and was a minute or so from losing his belt.

[stujones]

The major negative is that he can get hit and hurt at world level. Taylor is a big puncher, but not a massive puncher. I thought Taylor would have been to quick and made Froch miss all night. I didn't expect him to hurt Froch as many times as he did. I think if Taylor can hurt him, then Kessler can... and for my money, Kessler has a better chin and stamina than Taylor - although he is less fluid.

I think its a bit premature to call Joe a "china" chinned fighter... neither fighter hurt Joe after the KD and he did take Kessler's best shots.

[fist]

The major negative is that he can get hit and hurt at world level. Taylor is a big puncher, but not a massive puncher. I thought Taylor would have been to quick and made Froch miss all night. I didn't expect him to hurt Froch as many times as he did. I think if Taylor can hurt him, then Kessler can... and for my money, Kessler has a better chin and stamina than Taylor - although he is less fluid.

I think its a bit premature to call Joe a "china" chinned fighter... neither fighter hurt Joe after the KD and he did take Kessler's best shots.

Finally, some sense. Good post.

[tobyh5]

I like him but had he not caught Taylor in the last round you'rd have been singing a very different tune, he'd have lost the fight and paid the price for looking like a startled rabbit for the first 4/5 rounds.

Exactly. I know it is all about winning and at the end of the day the object of the exercise is to either win more rounds than the other guy and so get a points decision or to prevent the other guy reaching the final bell. So he did what he had to do BUT you cannot completely ignore exactly how close he was to losing. If Taylor had even enough in him to just grab hold of Carl after the knockdown, put him in a bear hug then the ref would have pulled them apart but it would have taken enough time to see him to the final bell.

So come on now, what would everyone be saying if he had not landed that shot in the final round and lost. He would not have only lost but actually lost badly, outboxed, outfought, hurt, dropped, caught with too many shots and proven short on skill level.

What all this arguing has caused is proved that Joe V Carl would be a fight that would excite and throw up a lot of debate, the type of fight that should be made. Of course Joe is retired but hey, JUST retired so it is very much a topic to be pushed.

What I will say for all you saying that Carl would do this and that to Joe and win the fight and saying Joe is not all that and slaps and blah blah, I am sure if I sat here and searched your post histories it would show you have said that all before either before the Lacy fight or the Kessler one and you know what boys, do not be so stubborn and admit that if you have been wrong before it is possible you may be wrong again. I respect arguing that you think something will happen a certain way but do not have time for talking in a manner that it is a foregone conclusion, it would definetly happen, that there is no doubt and not listening to replies when boxing has proven one thing over the last 110 years - you never know what happens until two fellas actually fight. Not just that but it is hardly a weak argument to suggest that a champion of 10 years standing, two division champion, 21 defences, beat his share of unbeatens (whether you respect them or not is irrelevant) etc etc could beat a world champion of one defence.

[tobyh5]

Oh and while Carl deserves respect for going to the US for this fight and beating a good former World Champion in his first defence, that is slightly glossing over the facts and the fact is Taylor was his mandatory meaning he had no choice in the opponent.

[Mensa07]

its funny, if that was Calzaghe getting knocked down & taken to school by Taylor he'd still be getting a kicking on the messageboards even with a comeback KO. 'Over-rated', 'exposed', 'suspect chin, knocked down by a career middleweight', etc etc. AS it was Froch, now its like he's the next Ray Robinson!

I'm glad I haven't (ever) been one the people talking Froch up as a great fighter, I'd have looked pretty silly at times on Saturday. He looked slow, awkward, and his performance just didn't contrast well with Taylors boxing. Another thing, holding his hands so low when they (& his reflexes) aren't all that fast just looks ridiculous. When Roy Jones did it, its because he was fast enough to react and counter without getting hit, Froch gets peppered by one-two's! He needs his good chin.

AS for Froch beating Calzaghe... thats a joke, right? Thats an easy Calzaghe decision all night. Kessler, I'd take him over Froch in a heartbeat. I'm sure Froch has plenty more exciting fights in him, his style practically guarantees it! but lets not get carried away, he isn't in that HOF, 'great' fighter category.

[tobyh5]

its funny, if that was Calzaghe getting knocked down & taken to school by Taylor he'd still be getting a kicking on the messageboards even with a comeback KO. 'Over-rated', 'exposed', 'suspect chin, knocked down by a career middleweight', etc etc. AS it was Froch, now its like he's the next Ray Robinson!

I'm glad I haven't (ever) been one the people talking Froch up as a great fighter, I'd have looked pretty silly at times on Saturday. He looked slow, awkward, and his performance just didn't contrast well with Taylors boxing. Another thing, holding his hands so low when they (& his reflexes) aren't all that fast just looks ridiculous. When Roy Jones did it, its because he was fast enough to react and counter without getting hit, Froch gets peppered by one-two's! He needs his good chin.

AS for Froch beating Calzaghe... thats a joke, right? Thats an easy Calzaghe decision all night. Kessler, I'd take him over Froch in a heartbeat. I'm sure Froch has plenty more exciting fights in him, his style practically guarantees it! but lets not get carried away, he isn't in that HOF, 'great' fighter category.

Exactly. It takes more than one win over over a career middleweight who has shown detoriation in recent fights to be marked down as a legend, especially when you were lost the 35 minutes of a 36 minute contest.

[WildWaylon]

Without doubt, especially if it's a KO win although I'd like Froch to fight Mundine and finish him for good although I doubt Anthony "I can only beat fat Aussie taxi drivers" Mundine would have the bottle.

Mundine is one of those guys who plays the villian role well.. He has done his thing and is passed it now.

Froch knows better than to face guys who are on the way down.

Facts are facts. Calzaghe may be the ebtter boxer, but Froch has done smoething Joe never did once in his career: Take a risk

TBH I thought Lacey and Kessler were both big risks and Hopkins the biggest. Too much Joe bashing going on here. Calzaghe pleaded with a prime Hopkins to fight him, and was told by BHop "get in line". We know Froch has bottle, are you trying to say Joe hasnt?