I miss Carl Froch!

[jamesmcdonnell]

Froch went on a run of top level fights that was the best run of any post war British fighter (taking out Mack).

Great fighter and sorely missed.

I miss him most because you knew he was lining up a 50/50 fight or 60/40 at worst.


With the Froch/Hatton debate. It's a close one and I wouldn't moan if someone had it different but I'd favour Hatton. Two weight world champion and Froch was never quite #1 SM in the world.

Hatton's second belt at WW was pretty much meaningless, he was NEVER considered the best WW in the world, or even part of the argument. He nearly got stopped twice by fairly mediocre challengers, and was spanked by Mayweather and Pacquaio.

Froch's resume is far more impressive.

[Covfefe]

Froch went on a run of top level fights that was the best run of any post war British fighter (taking out Mack).

Great fighter and sorely missed.

I miss him most because you knew he was lining up a 50/50 fight or 60/40 at worst.


With the Froch/Hatton debate. It's a close one and I wouldn't moan if someone had it different but I'd favour Hatton. Two weight world champion and Froch was never quite #1 SM in the world.

Hatton's second belt at WW was pretty much meaningless, he was NEVER considered the best WW in the world, or even part of the argument. He nearly got stopped twice by fairly mediocre challengers, and was spanked by Mayweather and Pacquaio.

Froch's resume is far more impressive.

It's not meaningless! He won it fair and square, you can criticise the level of opposition but he still did it. He was never right at WW, he also lost to Pac at LWW not WW. To say it's meaningless is pathetic, Froch never even considered going north of 168 even against someone like Collazo, his power was never great at 168 never mind against genuine light heavyweights. Hatton is a genuine two weight world champion, Froch simply isn't, to play down Hatton's achievement is pathetic, he had to go and win it and he won it hard that night.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Froch went on a run of top level fights that was the best run of any post war British fighter (taking out Mack).

Great fighter and sorely missed.

I miss him most because you knew he was lining up a 50/50 fight or 60/40 at worst.


With the Froch/Hatton debate. It's a close one and I wouldn't moan if someone had it different but I'd favour Hatton. Two weight world champion and Froch was never quite #1 SM in the world.

Hatton's second belt at WW was pretty much meaningless, he was NEVER considered the best WW in the world, or even part of the argument. He nearly got stopped twice by fairly mediocre challengers, and was spanked by Mayweather and Pacquaio.

Froch's resume is far more impressive.

It's not meaningless! He won it fair and square, you can criticise the level of opposition but he still did it. He was never right at WW, he also lost to Pac at LWW not WW. To say it's meaningless is pathetic, Froch never even considered going north of 168 even against someone like Collazo, his power was never great at 168 never mind against genuine light heavyweights. Hatton is a genuine two weight world champion, Froch simply isn't, to play down Hatton's achievement is pathetic, he had to go and win it and he won it hard that night.

I'm afraid it is meaningless, it was a just a belt. He was not a genuine WW champion, at least not in my eyes, he was a beltholder who won a soft title.

Why does Froch have to go to LHW, he never said he had any intention of doing so.

Dress it up any way you want, but Hatton's WW title was a load of bollox.

[Covfefe]

Hatton's second belt at WW was pretty much meaningless, he was NEVER considered the best WW in the world, or even part of the argument. He nearly got stopped twice by fairly mediocre challengers, and was spanked by Mayweather and Pacquaio.

Froch's resume is far more impressive.

It's not meaningless! He won it fair and square, you can criticise the level of opposition but he still did it. He was never right at WW, he also lost to Pac at LWW not WW. To say it's meaningless is pathetic, Froch never even considered going north of 168 even against someone like Collazo, his power was never great at 168 never mind against genuine light heavyweights. Hatton is a genuine two weight world champion, Froch simply isn't, to play down Hatton's achievement is pathetic, he had to go and win it and he won it hard that night.

I'm afraid it is meaningless, it was a just a belt. He was not a genuine WW champion, at least not in my eyes, he was a beltholder who won a soft title.

Why does Froch have to go to LHW, he never said he had any intention of doing so.

Dress it up any way you want, but Hatton's WW title was a load of bollox.

At least he had he balls to go up in weight. Yes he got starched by Mayweather and Pac but Froch hasn't ever even been near a ring with fighters that good! He nearly got starched in the first round against a fighter who may never win a world title, never mind fighters like Pac who are seven weight world champions. If Hatton's title is meaningless so are all of Froch's post Ward given Ward was the top of the pile without question.

[jamesmcdonnell]

It's not meaningless! He won it fair and square, you can criticise the level of opposition but he still did it. He was never right at WW, he also lost to Pac at LWW not WW. To say it's meaningless is pathetic, Froch never even considered going north of 168 even against someone like Collazo, his power was never great at 168 never mind against genuine light heavyweights. Hatton is a genuine two weight world champion, Froch simply isn't, to play down Hatton's achievement is pathetic, he had to go and win it and he won it hard that night.

I'm afraid it is meaningless, it was a just a belt. He was not a genuine WW champion, at least not in my eyes, he was a beltholder who won a soft title.

Why does Froch have to go to LHW, he never said he had any intention of doing so.

Dress it up any way you want, but Hatton's WW title was a load of bollox.

At least he had he balls to go up in weight. Yes he got starched by Mayweather and Pac but Froch hasn't ever even been near a ring with fighters that good! He nearly got starched in the first round against a fighter who may never win a world title, never mind fighters like Pac who are seven weight world champions. If Hatton's title is meaningless so are all of Froch's post Ward given Ward was the top of the pile without question.

[Covfefe]

Brilliant.

It's true though isn't it, if Hatton's title is meaningless cause it doesn't put him at he top (it certainly put him in the mix, hence the Mayweather fight) then Froch's post-Ward titles are as meaningless as he was clearly second best, at best. Roll your eyes all you want, but it's true.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I just can't be arsed, life's too short.

[Covfefe]

I just can't be arsed, life's too short.

Fair enough, but I would never say a fighters world title is meaningless. Even if you get bumped up from interim you had to fight your way to get there. People play down boxer's achievements far too much on here, Hatton had to go away to win that title in Boston and he won it hard, he was never big enough or strong enough to be a welter and that means the win is even more impressive. It isn't as good as beating Tszyu but to underplay it and say it's meaningless is insulting. Froch went from losing a domination to Ward to fighting Bute (stupidly some through he had no chance) and he won it impressively but you have to agree if Hatton's title is meaningless (which I don't think) then so is Froch's as he'd already lost to the number one, it was the same title as Hatton's just an alphabet title. Personally I think both are good wins and good title wins.

[mickey1975]

Didn't Ricky win The Ring FOTY?

[Horse]

Carl Froch (black) & Ricky Hatton's (red) best 10 results:

Kostya Tszyu
Mikkel Kessler II
Lucian Bute
George Groves II
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Jermain Taylor
Paul Malignaggi
Jose Luis Castillo
Mikkel Kessler I - (Lost)

Glen Johnson
Luis Collazo
Vince Phillips
Juan Urango
Andre Dirrell
George Groves I
Floyd Mayweather Jr - (Lost)
Carlos Maussa
Eamonn Magee
Juan Lazcano


I thought this was going to be more competitive, but Froch's record seems a lot better overall. Hatton's win over Tszyu is the only result that makes him in the same league as Froch.

Does anyone have any major disagreements with my list?

[mickey1975]

If you're going to credit Murray for heroic losses, how does Ricky get no credit for Floyd. He had a real go at Floyd, not many do. He only got stopped because he never stopped coming forward.

[Covfefe]

If you're going to credit Murray for heroic losses, how does Ricky get no credit for Floyd. He had a real go at Floyd, not many do. He only got stopped because he never stopped coming forward.

It was years before anyone else put it on him like that too. Mayweather isnt Martinez or Sturm either.

[Horse]

If you're going to credit Murray for heroic losses, how does Ricky get no credit for Floyd. He had a real go at Floyd, not many do. He only got stopped because he never stopped coming forward.

I did give him credit.

His loss to Mayweather is on there, but he was losing widely on points before getting knocked out.

Where should I have ranked that loss?

[mickey1975]

If you're going to credit Murray for heroic losses, how does Ricky get no credit for Floyd. He had a real go at Floyd, not many do. He only got stopped because he never stopped coming forward.

I did give him credit.

His loss to Mayweather is on there, but he was losing widely on points before getting knocked out.

Where should I have ranked that loss?

One of his best performances.

[tobyh5]

I missed Carl Froch, but then I reloaded and got the fukker.

[Horse]

One of his best performances.

Hatton gave it a good go and Cortez helped Mayweather a lot, but ultimately he was getting beaten clearly before getting stopped fairly brutally.

Having such a clear loss so high up in Hatton's best results doesn't seem right.

[Stuarty]

Carl Froch (black) & Ricky Hatton's (red) best 10 results:

Kostya Tszyu
Mikkel Kessler II
Lucian Bute
George Groves II
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Jermain Taylor
Paul Malignaggi
Jose Luis Castillo
Mikkel Kessler I - (Lost)

Glen Johnson
Luis Collazo
Vince Phillips
Juan Urango
Andre Dirrell
George Groves I
Floyd Mayweather Jr - (Lost)
Carlos Maussa
Eamonn Magee
Juan Lazcano


I thought this was going to be more competitive, but Froch's record seems a lot better overall. Hatton's win over Tszyu is the only result that makes him in the same league as Froch.

Does anyone have any major disagreements with my list?

Pretty fair list I'd say. I'd have Taylor and Pascal above the AA victory. Although the AA fight was a very good performance i felt as if Froch never really had to get out of second gear for that fight. AA offered little in way of resistance and Froch was basically just allowed to do what he wanted at a pace which suited him.

[Horse]

Pretty fair list I'd say. I'd have Taylor and Pascal above the AA victory. Although the AA fight was a very good performance i felt as if Froch never really had to get out of second gear for that fight. AA offered little in way of resistance and Froch was basically just allowed to do what he wanted at a pace which suited him.

Abraham had stopped Taylor less than a year before that fight and it was a very dominant performance compared to his struggle with Taylor, so that's my logic for putting the Abraham win ahead of the Taylor win.

Pascal went on to become the man at light heavyweight less than two years later, so maybe that win should be above Abraham.

[CaptainSpacerod]

I'd have Ricky's loss to Floyd right up near the top of that list.

He was facing probably the best fighter of his era who was in his pomp, away from home with the referee dead set against him and still gave a good account of himself.

Cortez' disgusting role in proceedings can't be understated. He took away Ricky's best weapon from the outset. It was akin to Larry Holmes not being allowed to use his jab.

[Bricks]

I really miss him.

Fought an almost uninterrupted murder's row: almost always 50/50, only slight favourite or expected to lose.

Was an actual fighter, had the bottle and the will to win and the chin to beat fighters more talented.

Going to see Froch live was fantastic: genuine excitement and tension, intrigue. Who will win? What will happen?

Froch may have been arrogant but was often humbled: by the Ward loss, by the fans turning on him over Groves. Now he has retired I think he is funny when interiewed. He has earned his swagger. What are the question marks over his career? He couldn't beat Ward? No shame in that. He ducked GGG? He was at the end and while I really really wanted to see it, i cannot begrudge him deciding to go out on his last win, one of the biggest nights in British boxing history.

He over takes Calzaghe in my opinion. Joe's biggest achievement was being undefeated and being the best in two weight divisions. His resume pales in camprison to the Frog though

Good posteus.

The ducking thing is laughable. People were screaming he is ducking groves. SO he devotes a year of his life to disputing that. Than they scream he is ducking groves and GGG. Such people are all that is wrong with humanity

Frochs strengths=vastly underrated boxing skills, lightning reflexes, Chin of iron and will to match. Very heavy handed despite looks to contrary
Negatives= feet cast in concrete. Slow hands. (never seen a fighter with such fast reflexes but slow hands)

His resume is far far tougher than Calzaghes.......

I think Carl would have had a very good chance at beating the calzaghe up to 2002....after that joe upped it a notch and gained a lot of confidence with lacey and would have bested carl

Unlike many I think joes swarming suits froch, and I cant see joe dancing his way to beat froch he wouldn't have the discipline to keep it long distance with carl.....I know im in the minority but I just think froch had a off night with ward and it would have been closer.

[Stuarty]

Pretty fair list I'd say. I'd have Taylor and Pascal above the AA victory. Although the AA fight was a very good performance i felt as if Froch never really had to get out of second gear for that fight. AA offered little in way of resistance and Froch was basically just allowed to do what he wanted at a pace which suited him.

Abraham had stopped Taylor less than a year before that fight and it was a very dominant performance compared to his struggle with Taylor, so that's my logic for putting the Abraham win ahead of the Taylor win.

Pascal went on to become the man at light heavyweight less than two years later, so maybe that win should be above Abraham.

Fair point. AA did a more convincing job on Taylor but that was after Froch had KO'd him. I just think the manner of Froch's win against Taylor puts it slightly above the AA win for me but you can certainly argue either way.

[Horse]

Fair point. AA did a more convincing job on Taylor but that was after Froch had KO'd him. I just think the manner of Froch's win against Taylor puts it slightly above the AA win for me but you can certainly argue either way.

Froch vs Taylor was a strong fight of the year contender (possibly winner, I can't remember), but I'm not sure whether it being a far more entertaining fight makes it a better win.

It was a very good win though. It's not a clear cut decision either way.

[Stuarty]

Fair point. AA did a more convincing job on Taylor but that was after Froch had KO'd him. I just think the manner of Froch's win against Taylor puts it slightly above the AA win for me but you can certainly argue either way.

Froch vs Taylor was a strong fight of the year contender (possibly winner, I can't remember), but I'm not sure whether it being a far more entertaining fight makes it a better win.

It was a very good win though. It's not clear cut decision either way.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Carl Froch (black) & Ricky Hatton's (red) best 10 results:

Kostya Tszyu
Mikkel Kessler II
Lucian Bute
George Groves II
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Jermain Taylor
Paul Malignaggi
Jose Luis Castillo
Mikkel Kessler I - (Lost)

Glen Johnson
Luis Collazo
Vince Phillips
Juan Urango
Andre Dirrell
George Groves I
Floyd Mayweather Jr - (Lost)
Carlos Maussa
Eamonn Magee
Juan Lazcano


I thought this was going to be more competitive, but Froch's record seems a lot better overall. Hatton's win over Tszyu is the only result that makes him in the same league as Froch.

Looks about right to me.

Does anyone have any major disagreements with my list?

[PredatorHayds]

Carl Froch (black) & Ricky Hatton's (red) best 10 results:

Kostya Tszyu
Mikkel Kessler II
Lucian Bute
George Groves II
Arthur Abraham
Jean Pascal
Jermain Taylor
Paul Malignaggi
Jose Luis Castillo
Mikkel Kessler I - (Lost)

Glen Johnson
Luis Collazo
Vince Phillips
Juan Urango
Andre Dirrell
George Groves I
Floyd Mayweather Jr - (Lost)
Carlos Maussa
Eamonn Magee
Juan Lazcano


I thought this was going to be more competitive, but Froch's record seems a lot better overall. Hatton's win over Tszyu is the only result that makes him in the same league as Froch.

Does anyone have any major disagreements with my list?

Froch has the better fights number wise but the Kosta win is number 1 by quite a margin.

I sometimes forget how good a win that actually was.