BoxRec

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:37**

Naandrew wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:30 Carl ducked a fight with Degale in order to fight that waste of space Chavez Jr.

When the Chavez Jr fight never happened then he retired.

He did what he slated Calzaghe off for. Except Calzaghe moved up to fight for the Lineal Title at LHW.

Carl was a great fighter but I've grown to dislike him since his retirement.

He is still bitter over the Andre Ward schooling. A great fighter just can't accept he was never "The Man" at Super Middle.

No. Joe ducked a mandatory before moving up. Carl (to his credit) took care of his in groves before retiring. He in no way "ducked" degale, and to accuse a man with Carl's record of that is just nonsense. There is always another name, and by that logic every fighter who ever retired has 'ducked' someone. I fail to recall ANYONE clamouring for froch vs degale at the time. I get people don't like him personally, but Carl ducked no one, his record speaks for itself.

A duck is what degale did in order to fight Eubank ie vacate rather than fight his mandatory

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:38**

and how many were clamoring for froch vs calzaghe? froch was really a nobody on the world stage then and we all know he was hardly a draw in those days. joe moved up and fought for more money and much more recongizable names, and in bhops case a still p4p fighter. and so what about the mandatory status anyway, its the opponent who counts

as you say, theres always another name anyway! at the time thats just what froch was

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:40**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:38 and how many were clamoring for froch vs calzaghe? froch was really a nobody on the world stage then and we all know he was hardly a draw in those days. joe moved up and fought for more money and much more recongizable names, and in bhops case a still p4p fighter

as you say, theres always another name anyway!

I don't disagree BUT froch was his mandatory so there was a reason for it to happen. James wasn't, and wasn't a draw either, so there was literally no reason on any level.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:42**

who cares about mandatory though. at the end of joes career, a guy being a mandatory isnt making the fight any bigger or more significant overall to his career. he went after far bigger names and money etc and actually won the lineal lhw title for those who care about that. a lot of ppl use revisionsim here....treating froch as the star he would become and not the guy he was at the time. still not proven one bit at world level and a small name on the world scene

i dont really think one is more of a 'duck' then the other, whether mandatory status was given by abc or not.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:46**

It's not really ducking when you take on one of the best fighters of your generation in a PPV bout in Las Vegas though.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:52**

lol i know right, ppl are mental if they think froch at that time was bigger fight then hopkins. its total revisionsism where froch is given the status he would later have but didnt have close to at the time

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:53**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:42 who cares about mandatory though. at the end of joes career, a guy being a mandatory isnt making the fight any bigger or more significant overall to his career. he went after far bigger names and money etc and actually won the lineal lhw title for those who care about that. a lot of ppl use revisionsim here....treating froch as the star he would become and not the guy he was at the time. still not proven one bit at world level and a small name on the world scene

i dont really think one is more of a 'duck' then the other, whether mandatory status was given by abc or not.

I don't disagree. Its just that the would be challenger can forever claim he was legitimately avoided. "He stepped up rather than face me" etc. Im merely pointing out that wasn't the case for degale

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:56**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:42 who cares about mandatory though. at the end of joes career, a guy being a mandatory isnt making the fight any bigger or more significant overall to his career. he went after far bigger names and money etc and actually won the lineal lhw title for those who care about that. a lot of ppl use revisionsim here....treating froch as the star he would become and not the guy he was at the time. still not proven one bit at world level and a small name on the world scene

i dont really think one is more of a 'duck' then the other, whether mandatory status was given by abc or not.

So for arguments sake, if wilder became mandatory for AJ, you would be fine with AJ never fighting him. Mandatorys do matter for me.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:56**

ya theres always someone else coming up who you can say 'so and so never fought them'

to me i think neither guy really deserves much knock for froch/degale. joe took fights that made much more sense and were bigger at the time and froch had fought loads of top fighters and was at a good time to retire. the talk of the chavez fight was basically just a farewell in a place hed always wanted to headline

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:57**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:56 ya theres always someone else coming up who you can say 'so and so never fought them'

to me i think neither guy really deserves much knock for froch/degale. joe took fights that made much more sense and were bigger at the time and froch had fought loads of top fighters and was at a good time to retire. the talk of the chavez fight was basically just a farewell in a place hed always wanted to headline

I agree

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 12:58**

Steveh583 wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:56
jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:42 who cares about mandatory though. at the end of joes career, a guy being a mandatory isnt making the fight any bigger or more significant overall to his career. he went after far bigger names and money etc and actually won the lineal lhw title for those who care about that. a lot of ppl use revisionsim here....treating froch as the star he would become and not the guy he was at the time. still not proven one bit at world level and a small name on the world scene

i dont really think one is more of a 'duck' then the other, whether mandatory status was given by abc or not.
So for arguments sake, if wilder became mandatory for AJ, you would be fine with him never fighting him. Mandatorys do matter for me.

mandatorys really add not much value at all to the credibility of the opponents to me, that is based on what theyve actually done. we get sh!t mandatories all the time. i dont think froch at the time he was mandatory was any higher level of fighter then degale was when froch retired

wilder would be an excellent opponent for aj because he's a top 3 hw and a massive puncher and it would be a great fight that everyone wants to see. the mandatory really means dick all to me

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 13:05**

this has turned into a 3 way royal rumble between, Froch, Calzaghe and Hopkins - are we all in agreement Froch is bitter?

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 14:44**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:56 ya theres always someone else coming up who you can say 'so and so never fought them'

to me i think neither guy really deserves much knock for froch/degale. joe took fights that made much more sense and were bigger at the time and froch had fought loads of top fighters and was at a good time to retire. the talk of the chavez fight was basically just a farewell in a place hed always wanted to headline

Agree with this.

On Froch, I don't think anybody has ever gone down so far in my estimations as a person since retiring from the sport. Comes across as an absolute arsehole time and time again.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 14:49**

The unpleasant side of Froch'scharacter made him the fighter he was.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 15:11**

He shouldn't be bitter.
He did KO George Groves in front of 80,000 people at Wembley.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 15:42**

KiwiRider wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 15:11 He shouldn't be bitter.
He did KO George Groves in front of 80,000 people at Wembley.

You'd think he'd mention it once in a while.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 15:53**

Froch turned down the Calzaghe fight twice. He conveniently forgets to mention that when he says he would have beat Calzaghe

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 16:04**

Coco wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 14:49 The unpleasant side of Froch'scharacter made him the fighter he was.

Very good point.

A lot of top sports people are narcissistic pricks, just some hide it better than others for the camera or social media.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 16:08**

I remember watching Gary Lineker on they think it's all over years back.
He was desperate to win even though it was a comedy show.
It shows the competitive nature needed to be a top sportsman.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 16:20**

jamamb wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:52 lol i know right, ppl are mental if they think froch at that time was bigger fight then hopkins. its total revisionsism where froch is given the status he would later have but didnt have close to at the time

Completely.

The only person interested in the fight at that time was Froch himself. Calzaghe said he would fight him if the money was right but there was no money in it because there was very little interest.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 17:00**

banjo wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 10:08
milpool wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 10:03 What's he done now?

He gave Degale a bit of praise wished him well but then finished his comment off by saying he didn't fight the best of the best and that if he'd met him in the ring he'd have smashed him.

Now I don't disagree with him on that prediction but as always he has to have a sly dig.

Vintage Froch!

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 18:24**

banjo wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 10:08
milpool wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 10:03 What's he done now?

He gave Degale a bit of praise wished him well but then finished his comment off by saying he didn't fight the best of the best and that if he'd met him in the ring he'd have smashed him.

Now I don't disagree with him on that prediction but as always he has to have a sly dig.

Who was the best of his era? Dirrel,Bute,Jack? Am i missing anyone? Cant count ward cause he moved up to light heavyweight and from what i remember froch fought ward once and got took to school at his own game.

Froch had a brilliant career entertained us all and beat every man he faced bar 1 so be humble and respectful.

Degale only said what Calzaghe said about Collins,what Froch said about Calzaghe,it is what it is,the next gen has to say this to hype his own career up plus obviously they would of liked to fight them to win the title instead of a vacant title fight.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 18:48**

Steveh583 wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:37
Naandrew wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 12:30 Carl ducked a fight with Degale in order to fight that waste of space Chavez Jr.

When the Chavez Jr fight never happened then he retired.

He did what he slated Calzaghe off for. Except Calzaghe moved up to fight for the Lineal Title at LHW.

Carl was a great fighter but I've grown to dislike him since his retirement.

He is still bitter over the Andre Ward schooling. A great fighter just can't accept he was never "The Man" at Super Middle.
No. Joe ducked a mandatory before moving up. Carl (to his credit) took care of his in groves before retiring. He in no way "ducked" degale, and to accuse a man with Carl's record of that is just nonsense. There is always another name, and by that logic every fighter who ever retired has 'ducked' someone. I fail to recall ANYONE clamouring for froch vs degale at the time. I get people don't like him personally, but Carl ducked no one, his record speaks for itself.

A duck is what degale did in order to fight Eubank ie vacate rather than fight his mandatory

Joe fought Hopkins a month before Carl became mandatory.

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 18:58**

Exactly.

Calzaghe was left with two choices.

Do you want to bow out against Froch for peanuts at a weight you've just moved up from?

Or do you want to bow out against Roy Jones for good money at Madison Square Garden?

People need to stop the lazy accusation that Calzaghe ducked Froch. It didn't happen. Calzaghe was done with super middle weight and wanted a last big pay day in a high profile fight in the states.

The ships just never passed in the night

Posted: **01 Mar 2019, 18:59**

ewenhay wrote: ↑01 Mar 2019, 18:58 Exactly.

Calzaghe was left with two choices.

Do you want to bow out against Froch for peanuts at a weight you've just moved up from?

Or do you want to bow out against Roy Jones for good money at Madison Square Garden?

People need to stop the lazy accusation that Calzaghe ducked Froch. It didn't happen. Calzaghe was done with super middle weight and wanted a last big pay day in a high profile fight in the states.

The ships just never passed in the night

Also worth pointing out Froch said he wouldn’t move up to fight him either.

BoxRec

Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?

Re: Why is Froch a bitter hunt?