Bobby Czyz 1987 v Carl Froch 2012

[Bricks]

Froch concedes 7lbs in a catchweight fight with the prime 87 version of Czyz.

[Rover]

At 175?
I'll take Czyz in a war. If Froch proves himself at light heavy in the future, could change my mind. This one's a match that is still subject to evaluation.

[Bricks]

Bobby was a good puncher and the 87 version had confidence in buckets. I think it would have been an incredible pier 6 brawl early on.

[JDC]

Froch can't concede 7lbs and be in a ''catchweight'', as there are only 7lbs between the two weights. Assuming you're asking what would happen at Lightheavy?

[Ezzard]

Different weigh in times though back then so probably evenly matched.

Would be an absolute classic. I think the tear ups would be 50-50 but I see Froch also scoring with his jab…and having a little more to his game so I like Froch on points or late stoppage…probably getting off the deck.

[Bricks]

@JDC what im asking is exactly what it says on the tin

The Froch of 168 vintage v the 175lbs Czyz. On paper Froch would be conceding 7lbs.

LOL If we start getting all pernickity about it, its going to be a debate about "well bobby used to weigh in at 175 on the day of the fight in 87 so didnt have much time to refuel" and "carl weighs in at 168 24 hours before so has plenty of time to fuel up and in theory might be bigger than bobby".

[JDC]

Not being nitpicky, I just don't understand this tin.

[Bricks]

Thats kool mate You make a very valid point its hard to call it catchweight when probably they would weigh the same anyway!