BoxRec

The two draw a obviouse comparison both having won medals at the world ametre championships in the same year and have now had 20 fights each. I was just wondering who's carrer everyone hear thinks has gon best.

Its interesting because although Haye has done better on the surfece (world shot holding ebu title) Froch has comepeeted in a much more challenging division and had fights in which he aught to have learned a lot more, also the two have both got a good deal of fans of late.

Froch IMO. Haye's career has improved and gained more credibility since the Maloney's have taken over.

I like the way Froch has cleaned up domestically, something Haye for one reason or another didn't manage.

Haye's.

Haye's already stepped up to Euro level and is in line for a title shot against the winner of Bell/Mormeck 2.

Froch probably needs a loss to learn from like Haye has.

Both on a par, although Haye is due a world title shot whereas Froch will have to wait longer. However, I think Froch is more solid than Haye, looks like he can take a punch better and is more robust. I think Haye is probably the better banger of the two. I expect both of them to win world titles at some point in their careers

In fairness it is probably more straightforward for Haye to obtain a shot at the world title due to the unfashionable division he’s currently in. I can’t see O’Neil Bell “calling the shots” in the division in quite the same way that Kessler/Calzaghe might choose to.

Hayes shot at the world title is almost a formality, whereas Froch’s promoter will have to overcome more politics to reach the same position.

On paper Haye looks to achieved more (EBU title and WBC final eliminator victory), buy I think Froch has fought better opposition.

Haye won the title by knocking out Gurov in the first round, but Gurov had already been knocked out in one round by London's Terry Dunstan seven years previously. Johaneson and Fragomeni were both good unbeaten fighters who David defended against, but neither had any big names wins on their record. And the Abdoul fight, was just like a sparring session.

Froch became the first man to knocked out Brian Magee, who has been fringe world class for a large part of his career. And Carl successfully defended his British title against two former British champions who had never lost their titles in the ring (Matthew Barney and Tony Dodson)

In truth both Haye and Froch are very good fighters, but for for me personally Froch just shades it at the moment.

Another thing these two have in common (as well as their style and amateur backgrounds is they both have possible megafights waiting for them from two Italian Welshmen who both now train together. Enzo Macranelli and Joe Calzaghe.

Those were all sort of my thoughts which is why I raised it. I think untill the last fight (being a WBC eliminator) I would deffinatly say froch cos of the caliber he has fought. Its difficult to say who stands to make the most money aswell SM has jucy fights but if Haye does okay at HW then that should serve him well too.

Salvador's opinion is similar to mine. I see Brian Magee as the gate keeper to world class - Brian Magee has come for some stick, but he has beaten some decent fighters and also should have got a decision vs Tsypko (who isn't bad).

Those who deserve to beat Magee are worthy of a top ten place, Froch did it and did it more convingly than Reid. He also beat Barney handily and Barney should have been an EBU champion at Light Heavy.

Gurov and Fragomeni (as tough as he was) wasn't worthy of a top ten placing when Haye fought them and are not gatekeepers to the top ten.