Joe Calzaghe : Has Froch's leagacy now overtaken Joe's ?

[macaca]

Pretty much agree with you. Froch has achieved more and has a better record. But Calzaghe was a much, much better fighter and in my opinion would have beat Froch quite easily.

b0ll0cks

[fasteddie]

why is no one mentioning pascal? he was undefeated and went on to rule at 175lb for a year or 2,for me if carl fought joe it would be 6 rounds to 0 in the first 6 round but i think carl would get to joe and stop him late on just my opinion. and record for record carl comes out on top. joe didnt beat everyone at 175 he fought 2 people and imo they wernt the best 175 fighters either,hopkins fought 1 fight at 175 before joe and won the ring magazine belt in that fight,this doesnt make him the best 175lber.

[MarkMcBurney]

Ability: Calzaghe by a distance

Record: Froch by a distance

Prime v prime: Calzaghe wide UD.

However if Calzaghe was ever stupid enough to be tempted back by a big money offer from the ring invader, Froch would beat him if he came back after a few years out straight into a Froch fight.

[hurlock]

Calzaghe's defining fight was v Hopkins which at the time I felt Hopkins a career middle was not enough but has since done pretty well.
Joes padded out record will allway's create criticism & I think when jc is on his game he out points froch in a tough fight.
Question is could jc maintain tough opposition like froch who is a hardend warrior

[stevieb_8006]

He fought Jones Jnr and Hopkins the 2 best fighters at that weight didn't need to fight anyone else.. Joe also fought Lacy who was the Ward of the time.. Anyone who believes Froch wouldn't of been schooled by Calzaghe should just stop following boxing.. Complete different levels and the Kessler fights showed that. As for Groves and Degale if Froch takes the fight with Groves he will lose his belts. He will lose them anyway because Ward schools him again. Only fight there that he could win is the Kessler rematch and that's a 50/50 fight.. He should move to light heavy and fight Cleverley no doubt a lot of you idiots on here will say Froch destroys Cleverley ask yourself why he has never took the huge pay day.. I like Froch he has a great chin but is quite limited and will never be the best in his division unlike Calzaghe at 2 weights.. But I'm sure we will hear different from the experts ^^^^^^

R u serious? Jones was a shadow of his own shadow.

No1 is saying froch would beat joe, just that his legacy is superior. r u a 14 year old?

U seem to have that childish "I like joe, so cant appreciate carl" attitude that has become common on boxing forums lately

[Bricks]

Always good to read your posts Mugabi.........

I agree with two of your statements. I also think that a pre Ruiz Jones beats Calzaghe with comparative ease. I also thought that Hopkins won the fight with Calzaghe by a round. Calzaghe didn't start to get anywhere in that fight until the seventh round and had been put down by Hopkins. Hopkins ran out of steam to a degree and Calzaghe slapped his way back and that is no criticism of Joe, it's just what he did. Again, a prime Hopkins eats him alive and as you say, a lot of people think Hopkins won that fight..

Thanks quixall. This is a very important point. The Hopkins fight was the one where joes kryptonite was discovered by the wily old Hopkins.Hopkins learnt that tie up one if calszaghes arms on the inside and he can't do those whirlwind patented 2 arm dervish like flurries he beat lacy, Jones jnr and others with. In short tie 1 arm up and Joe became the proverbial one legged man in an area kicking contest!

The secret and blueprint was out so Joe retired. Of course the reason he came back the last 6 v Hopkins so hard was he reverted to a less effective plan b and the old man hop got tired

[mickey1975]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

[lillywhite14]

He fought Jones Jnr and Hopkins the 2 best fighters at that weight didn't need to fight anyone else.. Joe also fought Lacy who was the Ward of the time.. Anyone who believes Froch wouldn't of been schooled by Calzaghe should just stop following boxing.. Complete different levels and the Kessler fights showed that. As for Groves and Degale if Froch takes the fight with Groves he will lose his belts. He will lose them anyway because Ward schools him again. Only fight there that he could win is the Kessler rematch and that's a 50/50 fight.. He should move to light heavy and fight Cleverley no doubt a lot of you idiots on here will say Froch destroys Cleverley ask yourself why he has never took the huge pay day.. I like Froch he has a great chin but is quite limited and will never be the best in his division unlike Calzaghe at 2 weights.. But I'm sure we will hear different from the experts ^^^^^^

This is

Lacy the Ward of his time!? If you want to compare Lacy to a modern day fighter when it comes to hype etc then Bute would be a much better comparison.

Jones was a shell of a shell, in his pomp he stands Calzaghe in his head. Calzaghe knew it and pretty much admitted it back in the day. Hopkins? For me a good win although plenty see it as a win for Hopkins.

As I mentioned before, Calzaghe didn't even manage to 'school' Bika or Salem ( not that i think you would have seen these fights, have you ever seen a Calzaghe fight? I reckon you just had a look at his record here on Boxrec! ) two tough, awkward fighters so I can't see how he would have 'schooled' Froch. I think he would have beat Froch, something along the lines of 116-112/115-113 but no schooling going on.
Also, Calzaghe didn't 'school' Kessler. That's a load of bollocks.

Groves, DeGale, Clev? You talk about levels yet overlook that these three operate on a level way below Froch and none have showed they are A) worthy of even fighting him and B) capable of beating him

Clev-Froch is another Maccarinelli-Haye for me. Lots of talk, noise etc beforehand from a fighter who isn't ready for the elite guys, somehow managing to nab a vacant paper title then subsequently getting his head taken off his shoulders against the first elite guy he faces. Someone who he shouldn't have been in the ring with.

[daviddee]

Firstly I don't dislike Froch.. The fact is he has never been number 1 in his division.. I will repeat that again for the complete idiots NEVER No1!!!! As for Jones and Hopkins both past their prime maybe but both would have best Froch. If Froch fights Hopkins you will find that out.. Froch has done really well is really over rate by twats!! As for Jeff Lacy before the Calzaghe many boxing experts were saying he is the real deal p4p king. Joe derailed that and destroyed him. Froch's defining fight is Bute who was never tested and as soon as he stepped up to World Level he got stopped.. Cleverley is faster stronger and walks through punches at light heavy weight will sit and trade with everyone that's why he would beat Froch probably got just as good a chin but Clev too fast and too clever. As for Groves he is far more talented that Froch. I believe he's a bigger puncher as well only way Froch could beat Groves is by KO and couldn't see that happening.. Before any of you idiots say how good Froch is go watch the Ward fight again!!

[lillywhite14]

Nobody is saying Froch is number 1 at super mid. Ward is. Ward is also arguably number 2 p4p.

For Lacy, see Bute. Both had similar level wins at world level before being destroyed by Joe and Carl respectively. If anything Bute had the better record by a touch.

Jones wouldn't have beat Froch. He was done by then and had been knocked out by the road warrior.
Hopkins would have had a great chance of beating Froch. To be fair, the old boy was a hairs breadth away from beating Calzaghe too.

Cleverly hasn't faced anyone yet and hasn't looked amazing in the process. Good fighter but will be exposed when he faces an elite level guy. He is the typical FW project. If he ever steps up and faces a top fighter he will find out he has been undercooked.

Why do people seemingly think Froch can't box and is extremely limited? It's not true. He gives everyone a very hard time and only someone as skilled as Ward, who can seemingly do almost everything, looked fairly comfortable against him. Cleverly, Groves etc are a billion miles away from Ward's level. Froch would knock both out. I think Mack would give Cleverly all he can handle

[daviddee]

Nobody is saying Froch is number 1 at super mid. Ward is. Ward is also arguably number 2 p4p.

For Lacy, see Bute. Both had similar level wins at world level before being destroyed by Joe and Carl respectively. If anything Bute had the better record by a touch.

Jones wouldn't have beat Froch. He was done by then and had been knocked out by the road warrior.
Hopkins would have had a great chance of beating Froch. To be fair, the old boy was a hairs breadth away from beating Calzaghe too.

Cleverly hasn't faced anyone yet and hasn't looked amazing in the process. Good fighter but will be exposed when he faces an elite level guy. He is the typical FW project. If he ever steps up and faces a top fighter he will find out he has been undercooked.

Why do people seemingly think Froch can't box and is extremely limited? It's not true. He gives everyone a very hard time and only someone as skilled as Ward, who can seemingly do almost everything, looked fairly comfortable against him. Cleverly, Groves etc are a billion miles away from Ward's level. Froch would knock both out. I think Mack would give Cleverly all he can handle

The point is Froch has never even been No1 at his weight Joe was at 2 weights that alone shows who has the better legacy.. Joes is one if the British all time greats if not the greatest!! Froch wouldn't even be in most people's top ten.. Legacy is the word used here!! Froch still has time but will not surpass Joe

[MarkMcBurney]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

Except that's not true is it?

The first fight that wasn't determined and Carl wanted is Bute, a risky fight that he was the underdog in.

You can hardly blame him for taking on Mack and having a marginally easier fight after so many top level ones.

[Pat Butcher]

Nobody is saying Froch is number 1 at super mid. Ward is. Ward is also arguably number 2 p4p.

For Lacy, see Bute. Both had similar level wins at world level before being destroyed by Joe and Carl respectively. If anything Bute had the better record by a touch.

Jones wouldn't have beat Froch. He was done by then and had been knocked out by the road warrior.
Hopkins would have had a great chance of beating Froch. To be fair, the old boy was a hairs breadth away from beating Calzaghe too.

Cleverly hasn't faced anyone yet and hasn't looked amazing in the process. Good fighter but will be exposed when he faces an elite level guy. He is the typical FW project. If he ever steps up and faces a top fighter he will find out he has been undercooked.

Why do people seemingly think Froch can't box and is extremely limited? It's not true. He gives everyone a very hard time and only someone as skilled as Ward, who can seemingly do almost everything, looked fairly comfortable against him. Cleverly, Groves etc are a billion miles away from Ward's level. Froch would knock both out. I think Mack would give Cleverly all he can handle

The point is Froch has never even been No1 at his weight Joe was at 2 weights that alone shows who has the better legacy.. Joes is one if the British all time greats if not the greatest!! Froch wouldn't even be in most people's top ten.. Legacy is the word used here!! Froch still has time but will not surpass Joe

Joe wasn't undisputed no 1 at LHW, he would have had to have beaten Dawson to be absolute no 1

[Pat Butcher]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

A bit of both. Other fighters pulled out of super 6 and didn't stick to the initial rules. Super 6 involved about 10 fighters in the end. As the other lad has said after super 6 Froch has fought Bute and Kessler as well as Mack so not that easy. He could have taken some easier fights. Agree with the Dirrell point, poor decision imo.

[lillywhite14]

Legacy means who has the better wins, achieved more, had a better run of opponents etc

Most here seem to think Froch has the better legacy where as Joe was more talented.

Being ranked number 1 don't mean anything does it? It's like saying Manny Pacquiao ain't an all time great because he wasn't ranked number 1, when Floyd Mayweather was in the same division!

Joe could have done more with his career and was a bit of a letdown. He should have gone to the states much earlier, took on Jones and Toney etc, sure, he would more than likely have lost but it would have seen him showcasing his skills against the best when it really mattered. The Jones fight he took part in was completely irrelevant to anyone's legacy and record to be honest.

His best wins are Kessler then Hopkins ( same Hopkins Taylor beat twice...more convincgly too ) then its Lacy then the rest are simply way below elite level.
Froch has Kessler, Pascal, Taylor, Abraham, Dirrell and Bute. Also fought Taylor, Ward and Kessler in their own backyard and went away essentially to outclass Abraham! That's why he tops Joe legacy wise.

[TheCobra]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

This post is just utter negative bullshit. Froch can't win in some people's eyes.

Bute and Kessler were 2 well-known world champions in the division. Mack was one gimme fight in a run of about 10 non-gimmes. Moan moan moan, that's all some British fight fans do. Enjoy Froch while he's here, was the same with Hatton, all some people could do was be negative, well he's gone now and who did we have to replace him for big fights and excitment in the British game, apart from Froch?

[TheCobra]

As for legacy, I'd tip it to Froch now, been in much better fights, the Super 6 and excitement of some of his fights mean he'll be remembered as a great British fighter, Calzaghe just had too much padding in his career for too long, then had a good run near the end a shame as he's definitely the better boxer. Still remembered as a British great, but just didn't have enough defining fights for me.

[Pat Butcher]

Froch is a fabulous fighter, but I feel Calzaghe was more successful and a better boxer. Joe fought all those put in front of him, including an in prime undefeated Kessler, at a time when critics were speculating (wrongly) that Calzaghe would duck him. Of course he wouldn't, he was a fighter and wanted to be the best. His success made him undisputed. Something Froch has not achieved yet. And its the latter and his two losses, which of course have provided the motivation to challange big names reguarly in recent years. Calzaghes dominance prevented such a scattering of supposed big names. Plus the fact that Joe retired and left an array of belts amongst some good boxers led to the unique Super Six, which Froch would have been insane not to be involved in, just as all the participants would have been. Calzaghe was never in that situation, partly because he dominated and ended up undisputed. Froch fought Bute because he was chasing a belt. Froch fought Kessler for a second time cos he wanted a belt and to avenge his loss. Joe was never in these situations because he kept winning. I also think as much as the comeback against Taylor was good, you cant ignore just how superior a declining Taylor was for much of the fight.

Kessler is seen as an example of Froch chasing big names, yet Calzaghe risked his titles and zero when Kessler was at his peak and undefeated. Johnson does not hugely enhance Froch's record and most other big names were part of the Super 6.

My point being that as much as Froch is a great fighter and deserves lots of respect, he is not as good as Calzaghe, and the argurments about opposition are misleading and relative to an indivual's successes and failures - remember, Lacy for example was one of the 'big' names just as some of Froch's opponents get referenced, until Calzaghe destroyed him - Joes dominance negated the weight of the name in a sense, because many backtracked and simply categorised Lacy as overhyped. What is less subjective is that Calzaghe won all belts.

Some good points fist. I think it's down to how you view it personally, what you think counts in terms of being a fighter that is recognised and respected. First off, i and most people would agree that Calzaghe was the more skillful boxer. I agree that Taylor was outboxing Froch and dominated much of the fight before running out of gas, but that in a large part was down to what Carl did and he still had to finish the job. He did that and credit to him for it. Froch is also a lot better and more experienced fighter than when he faced Taylor. I agree that teh super six tournament came at a good time for Froch and he would have joined whatever the circumstances. What the super six did, was to give Froch world level fights against genuine world title holders in back to back fights over a two year period. Regardless of anything else, having constant big fights and no interim fights has to be respected, regardless of how and why the super six tourmament came about.

I think Calzaghe gains great credit for beating Kessler when he was in his prime years and undefeated. I also think that he perhaps viirtually ended the career of Jeff Lacy. Prior to that fight, Lacy was seen as someoen who was going to blast Joe to pieces. Was Lacy over hyped or was Joe that good that he damaged Lacy beyond a point at which he could return as the fighter he should have been. I am inclined to think he was over-hyped. Dirrel was nothing special and Johnson over the hill, though awkward. For me, its the activity in the super six, plus the wins over Bute and Kessler and a still very dangerous Jermaine Taylor that makes me say that Froch has got the better leagacy. I said in a previous post that Carl's Dirrell and Johnson were Joes's Bika and Jones. Carl's Taylor was Joe's Hopkins and it could be said that Carl's Bute was Joe's Lacy. All subjective of course, but for me its the sustained activity over a short period of time against genuine world title holders that makes me give the nod to Froch and not Calzaghe.

I pretty much agree with all of that Quixall. I like both fighters and think a prime Joe would have beaten a prime Froch. As far as legacy goes I think Froch wins, constant top level opposition and fighting anywhere boosts Froch's record for me. I know Froch had to take more riskier fights like away against Taylor and joining Super 6 to progress but whatever the reason, he did it and deserves credit for it.

If Calzaghe had taken more risks and constantly chased better opposition then he would also get the credit but he never. It's a shame too, because Joe could have fought Pavlik while he was highly rated and beaten him, he could have been the first to beat Dawson and he could have beaten Froch too. Imagine those 3 wins on Calzaghe's record, there'd be no (repeated) debate. When Froch retires there will will be few questions becasue of his desire to push himself and fight the best. If more boxers had his attitude it would be a better sport.

[mickey1975]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

This post is just utter negative bullshit. Froch can't win in some people's eyes.

Bute and Kessler were 2 well-known world champions in the division. Mack was one gimme fight in a run of about 10 non-gimmes. Moan moan moan, that's all some British fight fans do. Enjoy Froch while he's here, was the same with Hatton, all some people could do was be negative, well he's gone now and who did we have to replace him for big fights and excitment in the British game, apart from Froch?

He had no title when he faced Bute, so was in no position to sit back and defend anything. I loved Hatton, and respect Froch, just dont get too carried away. He is clearly number two in the division, and pound for pound number one in the hypocrite rankings. He never shut up about a dodgy decision in the super 6 against Kessler (which was fair) and never mentions the true robbery (Dirrell). Plus the Groves/Clev/Magee shit...I would put money on it he does not fight Ward again.

[banjo]

He's certainly had the more exciting career for sure and I can safely say I'd rather watch a video of Carls career over Calzaghes, Joe may have had the victories over big names like Hopkins, Eubank and the tainted Mr Jones Jr. as well as humiliating an American who was supposedly the next big thing but most of Joes career bored me to tears.

[Quixall]

why is no one mentioning pascal? he was undefeated and went on to rule at 175lb for a year or 2,for me if carl fought joe it would be 6 rounds to 0 in the first 6 round but i think carl would get to joe and stop him late on just my opinion. and record for record carl comes out on top. joe didnt beat everyone at 175 he fought 2 people and imo they wernt the best 175 fighters either,hopkins fought 1 fight at 175 before joe and won the ring magazine belt in that fight,this doesnt make him the best 175lber.

Reading back on my post, i also thought " Why didn't i include Pascal" Good shout.

[Quixall]

Calzaghe's defining fight was v Hopkins which at the time I felt Hopkins a career middle was not enough but has since done pretty well.
Joes padded out record will allway's create criticism & I think when jc is on his game he out points froch in a tough fight.
Question is could jc maintain tough opposition like froch who is a hardend warrior

This for me Hurlock is the key point. Froch took part in a competition that put him in back to back fights against genuine world level fighters, with no easy interim fights in between. This over a period of two years, travelling overseas etc was the foundation upon which Carl improved as a fighter and earned his reputation. The wins over Bute and Kessler have added and solidified that reputation.

[Quixall]

Was Carl determined to build a legacy or forced into it? The super six made most of the fights compulsory! As soon as he got to call the shots with a powerful promoter and TV network we got Mack! If your going to hold Reid against Joe, you have to hold Dirrell against Carl. Far, far worse decision.

I think the word "forced" in to taking part in the super six is a bit strong. I don't think Bute was involved and it didn't damage his reputation at all did it. When Carl beat Bute he was hailed as superman, so the super six wasn't the be all and end all, but obviously it would have been a silly thing to miss out on.

[Quixall]

He fought Jones Jnr and Hopkins the 2 best fighters at that weight didn't need to fight anyone else.. Joe also fought Lacy who was the Ward of the time.. Anyone who believes Froch wouldn't of been schooled by Calzaghe should just stop following boxing.. Complete different levels and the Kessler fights showed that. As for Groves and Degale if Froch takes the fight with Groves he will lose his belts. He will lose them anyway because Ward schools him again. Only fight there that he could win is the Kessler rematch and that's a 50/50 fight.. He should move to light heavy and fight Cleverley no doubt a lot of you idiots on here will say Froch destroys Cleverley ask yourself why he has never took the huge pay day.. I like Froch he has a great chin but is quite limited and will never be the best in his division unlike Calzaghe at 2 weights.. But I'm sure we will hear different from the experts ^^^^^^

This is

Lacy the Ward of his time!? If you want to compare Lacy to a modern day fighter when it comes to hype etc then Bute would be a much better comparison.

Jones was a shell of a shell, in his pomp he stands Calzaghe in his head. Calzaghe knew it and pretty much admitted it back in the day. Hopkins? For me a good win although plenty see it as a win for Hopkins.

As I mentioned before, Calzaghe didn't even manage to 'school' Bika or Salem ( not that i think you would have seen these fights, have you ever seen a Calzaghe fight? I reckon you just had a look at his record here on Boxrec! ) two tough, awkward fighters so I can't see how he would have 'schooled' Froch. I think he would have beat Froch, something along the lines of 116-112/115-113 but no schooling going on.
Also, Calzaghe didn't 'school' Kessler. That's a load of bollocks.

Groves, DeGale, Clev? You talk about levels yet overlook that these three operate on a level way below Froch and none have showed they are A) worthy of even fighting him and B) capable of beating him

Clev-Froch is another Maccarinelli-Haye for me. Lots of talk, noise etc beforehand from a fighter who isn't ready for the elite guys, somehow managing to nab a vacant paper title then subsequently getting his head taken off his shoulders against the first elite guy he faces. Someone who he shouldn't have been in the ring with.

I sometimes wonder what people see if they do actually watch the fights lol. Daviedee, with all due respect is way off teh scale with his opinions. In his posts he just about gets every analysis wrong. Rather like an Alan Partridge character who wonders into a conversation at a bar, intent on impressing, but doesn't know the subject matter very well

[daviddee]

He fought Jones Jnr and Hopkins the 2 best fighters at that weight didn't need to fight anyone else.. Joe also fought Lacy who was the Ward of the time.. Anyone who believes Froch wouldn't of been schooled by Calzaghe should just stop following boxing.. Complete different levels and the Kessler fights showed that. As for Groves and Degale if Froch takes the fight with Groves he will lose his belts. He will lose them anyway because Ward schools him again. Only fight there that he could win is the Kessler rematch and that's a 50/50 fight.. He should move to light heavy and fight Cleverley no doubt a lot of you idiots on here will say Froch destroys Cleverley ask yourself why he has never took the huge pay day.. I like Froch he has a great chin but is quite limited and will never be the best in his division unlike Calzaghe at 2 weights.. But I'm sure we will hear different from the experts ^^^^^^

This is

Lacy the Ward of his time!? If you want to compare Lacy to a modern day fighter when it comes to hype etc then Bute would be a much better comparison.

Jones was a shell of a shell, in his pomp he stands Calzaghe in his head. Calzaghe knew it and pretty much admitted it back in the day. Hopkins? For me a good win although plenty see it as a win for Hopkins.

As I mentioned before, Calzaghe didn't even manage to 'school' Bika or Salem ( not that i think you would have seen these fights, have you ever seen a Calzaghe fight? I reckon you just had a look at his record here on Boxrec! ) two tough, awkward fighters so I can't see how he would have 'schooled' Froch. I think he would have beat Froch, something along the lines of <a href="tel:116-112/115-113">116-112/115-113</a> but no schooling going on.
Also, Calzaghe didn't 'school' Kessler. That's a load of bollocks.

Groves, DeGale, Clev? You talk about levels yet overlook that these three operate on a level way below Froch and none have showed they are A) worthy of even fighting him and B) capable of beating him

Clev-Froch is another Maccarinelli-Haye for me. Lots of talk, noise etc beforehand from a fighter who isn't ready for the elite guys, somehow managing to nab a vacant paper title then subsequently getting his head taken off his shoulders against the first elite guy he faces. Someone who he shouldn't have been in the ring with.

I sometimes wonder what people see if they do actually watch the fights lol. Daviedee, with all due respect is way off teh scale with his opinions. In his posts he just about gets every analysis wrong. Rather like an Alan Partridge character who wonders into a conversation at a bar, intent on impressing, but doesn't know the subject matter very well

Difference is I have see all both fighters fights!! In 10 years time people will still be talking about Calzaghe no one will even mention Froch now that's legacy!!!