Froch v Calzaghe

earsjohn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1691
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 14:34

Froch v Calzaghe

Post by earsjohn »

Could it happen?
Terminator666
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1662
Joined: 06 Nov 2007, 10:18

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Terminator666 »

No :TU:
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 22983
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by handsofstone »

I can see them squaring off in 10 years time with a Eubank/Benn Gladiator dual........or maybe a Strictly Come Dancing face off
rossij8
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1746
Joined: 16 Jul 2012, 08:06

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by rossij8 »

:yay:
Ian1973
Middleweight
Posts: 1447
Joined: 15 Feb 2014, 14:58

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Ian1973 »

:witzend: :witzend:

What is the point of this thread? Of course it won't happen.
magwitch
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4753
Joined: 30 Jun 2014, 20:04

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by magwitch »

only one winner.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by polecateddy »

Why do people keep starting new threads already done to death. Yawn!
Taansend
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11626
Joined: 10 Jul 2004, 17:38

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Taansend »

What about their kids?
WelshJack
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1332
Joined: 29 Mar 2013, 13:43

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by WelshJack »

Calzaghe way past his peak beat B-Hop. Says it all, no contest.
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by gobbles »

Taansend wrote:What about their kids?
Joe's youngest is about 18, Froch's oldest is about 4. I'd pick Calzaghe in this one
nobby_nobbins
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 654
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 16:07

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by nobby_nobbins »

Calzaghe was more skilled than Froch but retired to avoid fighting him, damaging his legacy in the process. A fighter shouldn't just be judged on who he's beaten, but who he's avoided, and Froch was a legitimate challenger who deserved his shot. He was far more legitimate than the shell of Roy Jones Junior. When Calzaghe was the hungry, undefeated challenger he was dodged by Steve Collins. Joe screamed blue murder over that and then did exactly the same thing to Froch. Froch is made of sterner stuff and accepted the challenge of the leading domestic rival of his era, George Groves.
coneye
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8565
Joined: 21 Jun 2004, 06:00

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by coneye »

Yes but we get a lot of talk about the old lion diucking the young lion ect ect .. But when your at the top like Joe was , everyone wanted a peice of him and he could'nt fight everyone , , Froch can retire today and people will say he ducked De gale , he can beat De gAle and it will be someone else he ducked ,, Its just the nature of things .

Hatton Did duck Witter though :OhYes:
gobbles
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2682
Joined: 18 Dec 2003, 15:04

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by gobbles »

nobby_nobbins wrote:Calzaghe was more skilled than Froch but retired to avoid fighting him, damaging his legacy in the process. A fighter shouldn't just be judged on who he's beaten, but who he's avoided, and Froch was a legitimate challenger who deserved his shot. He was far more legitimate than the shell of Roy Jones Junior. When Calzaghe was the hungry, undefeated challenger he was dodged by Steve Collins. Joe screamed blue murder over that and then did exactly the same thing to Froch. Froch is made of sterner stuff and accepted the challenge of the leading domestic rival of his era, George Groves.
I thought he retired to avoid Chad Dawson and Kelly Pavlik?

Depends whose script you are reading I suppose
stevedoc
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3550
Joined: 24 May 2013, 07:40

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by stevedoc »

nobby_nobbins wrote:Calzaghe was more skilled than Froch but retired to avoid fighting him, damaging his legacy in the process. A fighter shouldn't just be judged on who he's beaten, but who he's avoided, and Froch was a legitimate challenger who deserved his shot. He was far more legitimate than the shell of Roy Jones Junior. When Calzaghe was the hungry, undefeated challenger he was dodged by Steve Collins. Joe screamed blue murder over that and then did exactly the same thing to Froch. Froch is made of sterner stuff and accepted the challenge of the leading domestic rival of his era, George Groves.
so what if froch retires with out fighting degale.
whiskey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11956
Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 14:52

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by whiskey »

stevedoc wrote:
nobby_nobbins wrote:Calzaghe was more skilled than Froch but retired to avoid fighting him, damaging his legacy in the process. A fighter shouldn't just be judged on who he's beaten, but who he's avoided, and Froch was a legitimate challenger who deserved his shot. He was far more legitimate than the shell of Roy Jones Junior. When Calzaghe was the hungry, undefeated challenger he was dodged by Steve Collins. Joe screamed blue murder over that and then did exactly the same thing to Froch. Froch is made of sterner stuff and accepted the challenge of the leading domestic rival of his era, George Groves.
so what if froch retires with out fighting degale.
He wont.
spudder56
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 1568
Joined: 16 Jun 2011, 11:27

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by spudder56 »

coneye wrote:Yes but we get a lot of talk about the old lion diucking the young lion ect ect .. But when your at the top like Joe was , everyone wanted a peice of him and he could'nt fight everyone , , Froch can retire today and people will say he ducked De gale , he can beat De gAle and it will be someone else he ducked ,, Its just the nature of things .

Hatton Did duck Witter though :OhYes:

The problem was junior couldn't sell tickets so ricky didn't need him the ingles were calling ricky out when bunny was promoting him but as bunny said at the time the ingles had promotors licences why didn't they put the fight on personally I think junior would have won but that's another story but to say ricky ducked junior is ludicrous the ingles could have put the fight on at any time
coneye
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8565
Joined: 21 Jun 2004, 06:00

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by coneye »

Hatton said himself , he was'nt going to give jnr the fight . . He would of beat jnr , but and theres always a but , He did'nt
Boxerbeetle
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 32659
Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Boxerbeetle »

A Froch v Calzaghe thread has now turned into a Hatton v Witter thread.

Let it go guys :lol:
Teddy's Toupee
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2903
Joined: 25 Sep 2010, 17:37

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Teddy's Toupee »

Tyson vs Fury?
Rocky Balboa
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1851
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 16:38

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Rocky Balboa »

WelshJack wrote:Calzaghe way past his peak beat B-Hop. Says it all, no contest.
Watched the fight twice & Bernard was the winner, in my view. It was a person goes for though, in all honesty. Busiest or less busy but more effective.

Had there been a rematch, Hopkins would have made sure second time around.

Look at what Hopkins has done since & he might not be finished yet...
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by crusader »

I thought Calzaghe beat Hopkins without argument. People talk about Hopkins being so much more effective that he should have won despite being heavily out landed, but he was the one shelled up, holding, complaining, and/or flopping to the canvas throughout much of the bout under an attack that was clearly bothering him, while Joe generally looked like he was having a good time.

Sometimes I think that Hopkins has such a reputation for his boxing skill that people believe he's being particularly effective when he isn't.
magwitch
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4753
Joined: 30 Jun 2014, 20:04

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by magwitch »

crusader wrote:I thought Calzaghe beat Hopkins without argument. People talk about Hopkins being so much more effective that he should have won despite being heavily out landed, but he was the one shelled up, holding, complaining, and/or flopping to the canvas throughout much of the bout under an attack that was clearly bothering him, while Joe generally looked like he was having a good time.

Sometimes I think that Hopkins has such a reputation for his boxing skill that people believe he's being particularly effective when he isn't.
I've grown to admire Hopkins a lot over the last few years, but in that fight he cheated blatantly on a few occasions and mostly spoiled, it was a horrible performances and a difficult job well done by Joe actually.
Sklar
Middleweight
Posts: 5680
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 09:06

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by Sklar »

crusader wrote:Sometimes I think that Hopkins has such a reputation for his boxing skill that people believe he's being particularly effective when he isn't.
I know what you mean. Bernard is a bit like an anti-humour comedian who has long runs of subtle genius interspersed with dollops of messy crap. The people who 'get' the genius often refuse to accept the crap for what it is just in case they might be missing something.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45213
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

magwitch wrote:
crusader wrote:I thought Calzaghe beat Hopkins without argument. People talk about Hopkins being so much more effective that he should have won despite being heavily out landed, but he was the one shelled up, holding, complaining, and/or flopping to the canvas throughout much of the bout under an attack that was clearly bothering him, while Joe generally looked like he was having a good time.

Sometimes I think that Hopkins has such a reputation for his boxing skill that people believe he's being particularly effective when he isn't.
I've grown to admire Hopkins a lot over the last few years, but in that fight he cheated blatantly on a few occasions and mostly spoiled, it was a horrible performances and a difficult job well done by Joe actually.

It was indeed an awful spectacle. Hopkins tried every trick in the book to avoid having an actual fight - it's testament to how much he must have respected Calzaghe that he felt the need to do so.
nobby_nobbins
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 654
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 16:07

Re: Froch v Calzaghe

Post by nobby_nobbins »

Degale was beaten by Groves and was not Froch's leading domestic rival. Froch took on the challenge of the "young lion" and Calzaghe did not, preferring instead to feast on glitzy names that were many years past their prime.
Last edited by nobby_nobbins on 28 Aug 2014, 13:18, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply