Carl Froch v Joe Calzaghe

[Stocko]

What would have the result been if they had fought?
I reckon Froch may have knocked Calzaghe down before Calzaghe ground out the win.

 

[Loop]

Froch for me.

 

[Blf]

Calzaghe with ease.

 

[gregorgregorovich]

Calzhage. Unbeaten, rated 2nd greatest European boxer of all time. I like both of them, but Calzhage was the better boxer. For Froch to knock him down before Calzaghe ground out a win would require Froch doing something he never did, starting quickly.

 

[borolad259]

Calzaghe, and not even close. Best British boxer I have seen in my lifetime and with only a few in the world better.

 

[Priv]

Calzaghe with a comfortable points win, I expect Froch would of made a few of the rounds uncomfortable for him as Calzaghe towards the end of his career couldn’t hit hard enough to hurt Froch due to the damage in his hands, so may of struggled to keep him off him at times.

 

[brattleboro]

calzaghe is a totally different class,it would have been very unfair on froch,hes simply not in the same league

 

[Benjiboy]

Calzaghe's schooling of Bernard Hopkins tells you all you need to know , Hopkins was the most feared fighter in boxing around that time.....& Joe went into Hopkins backyard & outclassed him

 

[zzzzz]

Calzaghe all day long. A pureist, a warrior and his record against the very best is astonishing.
Imagine if they both came back for a one-off......... I hope not though.

 

[Carlos Fandango]

If you've got a spare hour watch this masterclass.

 

[Nero]

I was a massive fan of Froch and nobody can deny he always went for the big fights. Calzaghe would have been too much for him though, even towards the end of his career.

 

[SilentProf]

I loved watching both but peak Calzaghe would have done the same to peak Froch as he did to just about everyone he fought. 100+ punches per round is astonishing at that weight over 12 rounds. Even if they don’t have knockout power behind them, damage accumulates as we saw in the Lacy fight.

 

[Uwefuchs]

We've got to be talking both of them in their prime?

Calazghe wins on points probably about 10 rounds to 2.

Go back and watch Calzaghe v Kessler and then Kessler v Froch x2.
Kessler was competitive vs Calzaghe for the first half of the fight and then Joe found an extra level and an extra gear and won pretty comfortably in the end. I'd also say Kessler has better footwork and movement around the ring so I think Froch would be less competitive than the Dane was.

Froch vs Kessler were two absolute wars where it was hard to separate them. Froch was good and tough as nails but Calzaghe was a different league and Froch's slow plodding style would have been perfect for him.

 

[Pembroke]

Calzaghe would win widely on points and break his hands bouncing jabs off Frochs face through that less than stellar defence.

Froch was very very good, Calzaghe was exceptional.

 

[Honey_Glazed_Sausages]

Calzaghe's schooling of Bernard Hopkins tells you all you need to know , Hopkins was the most feared fighter in boxing around that time.....& Joe went into Hopkins backyard & outclassed him

Hopkins was 43 and had 4 losses to his name when he fought Calzaghe

 

[Chappy112]

Froch has the better resume but I think prime for prime Calzaghe would outpoint him. Great fight though.

 

[borolad259]

Hopkins was 43 and had 4 losses to his name when he fought Calzaghe

And yet he came back to defeat Kelly Pavlik and then win and retain the light heavy world title and hold the liner/ring world title. So he was hardly washed up. He was a freak physically for that age.

 

[Heam44]

Calzaghe on points.

 

[DonTheKing]

Froch has the better resume but I think prime for prime Calzaghe would outpoint him. Great fight though.

Better resume?

 

[Wez68]

Calzaghe points win , doubt he would have hurt Froch as he was one hard b****d.