Legacy of the Cobra

First topic message reminder :

After having blasted out Bute in devastating fashion back In May, and after having knocked out fronge world level fighter Yusef Mack, i continually end up asking myself "how good is Carl?"

How do you all view him in terms of inside and outside the ring?

How will he finish his career?

Where does he land in the rankings in British fighter history?

And finally, how does he cement his legacy?

Got a question lads. Firstly I havent seen the ward-froch fight, but on boxrec it says 2 of the score cards were 115-113(i think), doesnt that mean that had just 1 round been a 10-9 to froch rather than ward it would have been a Draw? I only ask because people always seem to say ward realy outclassed froch, but how could that be if it was just 1 round?(again this is a genuine question)

Two cards were terrible mate. I'm a froch fan but he was never really in it. He came on stronger at the end but it was too little too late. Plus ward knew he had done enough so probably was easing off

Froch will go down as a good fighter who failed to win the really big fights to become the man at his weight but showed a lot of heart

Steffan wrote:Froch will go down as a good fighter who failed to win the really big fights to become the man at his weight but showed a lot of heart

Slightly harsh, but a reasonable statement

lfc91 wrote:Got a question lads. Firstly I havent seen the ward-froch fight, but on boxrec it says 2 of the score cards were 115-113(i think), doesnt that mean that had just 1 round been a 10-9 to froch rather than ward it would have been a Draw? I only ask because people always seem to say ward realy outclassed froch, but how could that be if it was just 1 round?(again this is a genuine question)

They were really just two very, very odd cards to be honest, mate. The third card, reading 118-110 (if my memory serves me!) was much more in line with what went on.

I think I had it 117-112 on the night, but acknowledged that such a score was maybe being a little kind to Carl. I think the only way anyone could come up with a 115-113 card for that fight, at an absolute stretch, is if they were actively looking to give Froch rounds wherever they could and were basing their scoring incredibly heavily on who was the aggressor, rather than who was doing the cleaner work.

It was pretty one-sided, truth be told. More frustrating than anything for Froch, because he just never really got going, so to speak.

Cheers spencer and chris. Was always confused by those 2 cards after reading that everyone on here thought it was very 1 sided!

Must admit Chris I had the fight scored 115-113 to Ward.

Seven rounds were clear for Ward while three were clear for Froch with two that could have gone either way, it was overall a very comfortable victory for Ward but round by round I had it a lot closer than most.

So am I the only one that gives Froch a shout if beating Joe. Must admit it is slightly surprising that a man who has beaten Dirrell, Bute, Abraham, Taylor etc... That he isn't even given a shout. I'm someone like Mitchell of an old shopworn Jones can put him down I see no reason why Froch can't give it a good go.

The problem with Joe wasn't so much as putting down, but keeping him down. Froch does have a chance, and my support, but my head still says Calzaghe wins this one. Sorry, Jack

Lumbering_Jack wrote:So am I the only one that gives Froch a shout if beating Joe. Must admit it is slightly surprising that a man who has beaten Dirrell, Bute, Abraham, Taylor etc... That he isn't even given a shout. I'm someone like Mitchell of an old shopworn Jones can put him down I see no reason why Froch can't give it a good go.

I think style wise Calzaghe is all wrong for Froch, even if there is only a shade between them the styles really do match up well for Calzaghe in this one. I think Calzaghe would have more problems with Bute and Taylor than he would Froch.

I do remember you and someone else (might have been coxy, but don't take that as gospel) agreeing with the 115-113 scores, Ghosty.

Scoring round by round can give a distorted view, I agree, but I can't see where Froch could possibly win a round (as in, win it for sure) until the ninth. The fifth was close, but aside from that I don't think Carl got a sniff until the final quarter of the fight, by which point Ward took his foot off the gas a little.

As you say yourself, Ward was appreciably the better man regardless of scores, so it doesn't matter too much in the long run, but if you score it 115-113 then essentially you'd have Froch (for example) being just a flash knockdown and an extra drawn round away from getting a draw and being called Ward's equal on the night, which isn't a lot really - and for me, there's just no way the gap could possibly have been that small, regardless of scoring methods.

I'm not saying its a fore gone conclusion by any means but over a 3 fight series id fancy Froch to take at least one of them. I think Froch awkward style would cause Joe a lot of problems and he would land hard and often.

I had it wide for Ward, I thought it was pretty clear cut, Froch came on strong late.

88Chris05 wrote:I do remember you and someone else (might have been coxy, but don't take that as gospel) agreeing with the 115-113 scores, Ghosty.

Scoring round by round can give a distorted view, I agree, but I can't see where Froch could possibly win a round (as in, win it for sure) until the ninth. The fifth was close, but aside from that I don't think Carl got a sniff until the final quarter of the fight, by which point Ward took his foot off the gas a little.

As you say yourself, Ward was appreciably the better man regardless of scores, so it doesn't matter too much in the long run, but if you score it 115-113 then essentially you'd have Froch (for example) being just a flash knockdown and an extra drawn round away from getting a draw and being called Ward's equal on the night, which isn't a lot really - and for me, there's just no way the gap could possibly have been that small, regardless of scoring methods.

Ward tired, he was happy to see the final bell.

The scoring was odd for the Froch/Ward fight. One judge gave 4 out of the first 5 rounds to Froch and then the last two rounds to Ward.

manos de piedra wrote:The scoring was odd for the Froch/Ward fight. One judge gave 4 out of the first 5 rounds to Froch and then the last two rounds to Ward.

Maybe they need bigger names on their shorts.

Ignore Froch as a person and as one of his biggest fans i'll admit he needs to wind his neck in at times but as a fighter I fail to see how anyone can do anything but admire him. He's taken on all the big names in his division often starting off as a heavy underdog and come out of it with only two losses one of which was of his doing and the other against an exceptional talent. The thing I like most about Froch is the fact we know exactly where to rate him, he came up short against the best two fighters he's faced one of whom I fully expect to beaten in a rematch but he's beaten the best of the rest some of them with ease and majesty. Abraham, Bute, Taylor, Pascal, Dirrell, Johnson, Mack, Reid and Magee isn't a set of wins to be sniffed at.

Super D Boon wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:Depends what Legacy means. It is usually something that is left behind to other people. I'd argue that Froch has already left a bigger impact on the world boxing stage than Calzaghe. Certainly the American audiences will have seen more of him and be more familiar with him than they were for Calzaghe.

NahI doubt it. In America people rate Calzaghe very highly, because of the demolition of Lacy, Kessler and the two American greats. Froch would have to beat both Kessler and Ward to establish a better legacy.

People forget the myth of the "0" carries a long way. Marciano for example would barely be spoken about if he was 48-1. Also Froch needs to own a division and despite his continuous high quality match upds he doesn't. He should move up to LHW affer dealing with Bute. He could beat any of those champions but is getting on a bit so needs to move sooner rather than later and forget all about Ward.

I suspect you'll find that many Americans don't rate Calzaghe all that highly based on the four wins you mentioned. Lacy went on to achieve absolutely zero after being exposed. As an aside; he'd undergone shoulder surgery prior to facing Calzaghe, and may have even lost his edge before their match. Jones Jr was a fight even Calzaghe had scoffed at, and is worthless, legacy-wise, and there are as many people who thought Hopkins won as thought he lost. Kessler is the only really great win there. Calzaghe is seen as a stay-at-home guy who fought stiffs for ten years. Talent comparisons aside, Froch has superseded Calzaghe in terms of fan legacy, if not in career achievements.

Oh, and as for the value of the '0'; Ottke has his, and is a nobody.

According to Joe Calazaghe "When you beat a Legend you become a Legend" (regardless of age ) since JC beat two 100 year old legends this means he must be a legend himself, If Froch can beat Ward in better fasion Ward beat Froch He will go down as a legend in my eyes.

"Fan legacy" what the hell are you talking about? You're making up bullsh!t that can't be backed up. That paragraph of drivel isn't even worth quoting. Being owned by Andre Ward wouldn't usually garner a lot of fans.

Super D Boon wrote:"Fan legacy" what the hell are you talking about? You're making up bullsh!t that can't be backed up. That paragraph of drivel isn't even worth quoting. Being owned by Andre Ward wouldn't usually garner a lot of fans.

Spot on. Really there is no comparison between Froch and Calzaghe I dont know why people even bother to compare them! Calzaghe was in a different league to Froch. People who think Froch has a better legacy than Calzaghe simply dont follow boxing or have been fooled by the hype. Froch has lost to fighters that Calzaghe either beat himself or would have easily beaten. Froch is lucky Calzaghe decided to retire because he would have been given a beating by him.

Knowing you have Gordy backing you up must give you one heck of a warm feeling inside D

Yeah, that told us (hangs head in shame). How dare we suggest that Calzaghe was very talented but with very little ambition and then back it up with facts!

Gordy can be right Jeff sometimes. I'm just curious as to this "fan legacy" thing and what it means.

By the way - I hate to be the first to tell you, but Rotheram Joe Gans is a daft username.

The guy has got one problem......He's as boring as pasteurised milk....which probably means he'll rank lower down than the more charismatic Hatton and the more appealing Calzaghe......

Also Calzaghe had more "British" nmaes to catapult him into the spotlight.....(Eubank, Reid etc) guys with "Name-value"...........

Think Froch has beaten better fighters and deserves high status.....But two defeats in his biggest fights and a boring personality will hurt the guy...

I guess that boring is in the eye of the beholder, then, Truss, because I'm shot if I understand what makes Calzaghe or Hatton such interesting people. Strictly come dancing? The fact that Joe is of Sardinian descent? Ricky's ability to wear foul shirts, swill Guinness and eat several fry-ups a week? Ricky's football club being better than Carl's? The brilliance of Calzaghe's autobiography?

Don't see it myself. Froch hasn't done enough to rank ahead of Joe on the all-time UK boxers list, but he's clear of Hatton, in my opinion. He also seems articulate, possesses a sense of humour and, ever since he stopped bleating about Calzaghe not giving him a fight, comes across as a pretty well-rounded character. Clearly, he doesn't have Ricky's "man of the people" schtick, but I can't help it if I think that's a load of hackneyed old guff anyway. Anyone who speaks about themselves in the third person immediately rates as one of the great bores of their era.

It's fairplay Captain..........

.But look nowhere did I say in the post he doesn't belong up there...

It's just that there is nothing attractive to the casual fan.....maybe because of Calzaghe's looks or Hatton's personality they caught more of the imagination.....

Or perhaps the fact he had Hennessy for much of his career..

I value substance over style................too

captain carrantuohil wrote:I guess that boring is in the eye of the beholder, then, Truss, because I'm shot if I understand what makes Calzaghe or Hatton such interesting people. Strictly come dancing? The fact that Joe is of Sardinian descent? Ricky's ability to wear foul shirts, swill Guinness and eat several fry-ups a week? Ricky's football club being better than Carl's? The brilliance of Calzaghe's autobiography?

Don't see it myself. Froch hasn't done enough to rank ahead of Joe on the all-time UK boxers list, but he's clear of Hatton, in my opinion. He also seems articulate, possesses a sense of humour and, ever since he stopped bleating about Calzaghe not giving him a fight, comes across as a pretty well-rounded character. Clearly, he doesn't have Ricky's "man of the people" schtick, but I can't help it if I think that's a load of hackneyed old guff anyway. Anyone who speaks about themselves in the third person immediately rates as one of the great bores of their era.

Super D Boon disagrees. Froch hasn't really found a niche in the market in terms of being a likeable character in some way or another. Maybe with the hardcore boxing fans but that's all. As Truss said, Calzaghe looks, Hatton man of the people, Bruno the loveable big dope etc,. Froch has just come across as bitter and twisted and arrogant with none of the charm. The spats with Khan are not doing him any favours in the popularity stakes either.

Who cares, he fights the best all the time, what more could you ask from a boxer?

Super D Boon wrote:"Fan legacy" what the hell are you talking about? You're making up bullsh!t that can't be backed up. That paragraph of drivel isn't even worth quoting. Being owned by Andre Ward wouldn't usually garner a lot of fans.

Put simply; Froch is much easier to like, and easier to make excuses for, from a fan's perspective. He's never shied away from a challenge, and that in some ways mitigates his losses. Calzaghe was dominant for longer and never lost, but he spent ten years fighting nobodies and is known in the States for arguably losing to Hopkins and for beating a knackered Roy Jones Jr, years after he (Calzaghe) had mocked the idea of that fight. It's in black and white in his incredibly boring autobiography. By 'fan legacy' I meant that Froch will be remembered more favourably, whereas Calzaghe has the better record when it comes to the statistics.

Froch lost because he pushed himself. Calzaghe retired with his '0' because he did the exact opposite. Seems only deluded nut-huggers are unable to accept that fact.

Hopkins had a good career after losing to Joe...........Kessler!!!........unbeaten Lacy.....

Calzaghe could've pushed himself...but he had more appeal and didn't lose either....

A lot to like about Froch for the genuine fan....but not much for the sports fan to be a***d about..............

I rate Froch...............

Gordy wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:"Fan legacy" what the hell are you talking about? You're making up bullsh!t that can't be backed up. That paragraph of drivel isn't even worth quoting. Being owned by Andre Ward wouldn't usually garner a lot of fans.

Spot on. Really there is no comparison between Froch and Calzaghe I dont know why people even bother to compare them! Calzaghe was in a different league to Froch. People who think Froch has a better legacy than Calzaghe simply dont follow boxing or have been fooled by the hype. Froch has lost to fighters that Calzaghe either beat himself or would have easily beaten. Froch is lucky Calzaghe decided to retire because he would have been given a beating by him.

Who's using the family brain cell this month son? Calzaghe would've easily beaten Ward? It's questionable if he'd beat him, to say he'd beat him easily is the folly of a lobotomy patient.

Ward has it all for me.........However Calzaghe being a lefty, solid with a rap..

Couldn't rule an upset out..................

Ward for me........

back on topic slightly, I think Froch is a real throwback to the "old days" when there was only one belt and the best fought the best. Froch has done that, without fail, and he can only be commended for doing so, particularly given the strength of his division. A dying breed you feel unfortunately.

As for Calzaghe, I think a valid point has been made that he didn't really avoid many fighters: in fact Ottke is the only proper name missing from his resume (and there were decent reasons for that). Yes he could have moved up in weights earlier and faced the Hopkins and Jones earlier (though Hopkins's later career suggests he wasn't too washed up when Calzaghe beat him in the States), and yes he could have travelled a bit more, rather than staying in his comfort zone, but the simple fact is the SMW division was much weaker when he was around than it is now.

Super D Boon wrote:

captain carrantuohil wrote:I guess that boring is in the eye of the beholder, then, Truss, because I'm shot if I understand what makes Calzaghe or Hatton such interesting people. Strictly come dancing? The fact that Joe is of Sardinian descent? Ricky's ability to wear foul shirts, swill Guinness and eat several fry-ups a week? Ricky's football club being better than Carl's? The brilliance of Calzaghe's autobiography?

Don't see it myself. Froch hasn't done enough to rank ahead of Joe on the all-time UK boxers list, but he's clear of Hatton, in my opinion. He also seems articulate, possesses a sense of humour and, ever since he stopped bleating about Calzaghe not giving him a fight, comes across as a pretty well-rounded character. Clearly, he doesn't have Ricky's "man of the people" schtick, but I can't help it if I think that's a load of hackneyed old guff anyway. Anyone who speaks about themselves in the third person immediately rates as one of the great bores of their era.

Super D Boon disagrees. Froch hasn't really found a niche in the market in terms of being a likeable character in some way or another. Maybe with the hardcore boxing fans but that's all. As Truss said, Calzaghe looks, Hatton man of the people, Bruno the loveable big dope etc,. Froch has just come across as bitter and twisted and arrogant with none of the charm. The spats with Khan are not doing him any favours in the popularity stakes either.

Correct. Froch is very bitter of Calzaghe and his success. He comes across as an unpleasant character who has to have a pop at others. Calzaghe is a far bigger name than Froch is. Once Sky Sports stop overhyping Froch nobody will remember who he is but people will always remember Calzaghe.

Gordy is very bitter of Froch and his success. He comes across as an unpleasant character who has to have a pop at others. Froch is a far bigger name than Gordy is.

Oh, I think you'd be surprised, Gordon - even Chris Eubank, the Sky hype job to end all Sky hype jobs, gets a mention now and then these days!

Gordy wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:

captain carrantuohil wrote:I guess that boring is in the eye of the beholder, then, Truss, because I'm shot if I understand what makes Calzaghe or Hatton such interesting people. Strictly come dancing? The fact that Joe is of Sardinian descent? Ricky's ability to wear foul shirts, swill Guinness and eat several fry-ups a week? Ricky's football club being better than Carl's? The brilliance of Calzaghe's autobiography?

Don't see it myself. Froch hasn't done enough to rank ahead of Joe on the all-time UK boxers list, but he's clear of Hatton, in my opinion. He also seems articulate, possesses a sense of humour and, ever since he stopped bleating about Calzaghe not giving him a fight, comes across as a pretty well-rounded character. Clearly, he doesn't have Ricky's "man of the people" schtick, but I can't help it if I think that's a load of hackneyed old guff anyway. Anyone who speaks about themselves in the third person immediately rates as one of the great bores of their era.

Super D Boon disagrees. Froch hasn't really found a niche in the market in terms of being a likeable character in some way or another. Maybe with the hardcore boxing fans but that's all. As Truss said, Calzaghe looks, Hatton man of the people, Bruno the loveable big dope etc,. Froch has just come across as bitter and twisted and arrogant with none of the charm. The spats with Khan are not doing him any favours in the popularity stakes either.

Correct. Froch is very bitter of Calzaghe and his success. He comes across as an unpleasant character who has to have a pop at others. Calzaghe is a far bigger name than Froch is. Once Sky Sports stop overhyping Froch nobody will remember who he is but people will always remember Calzaghe.

Froch will always be remembered by any true fan of boxing on these shores you tool. He has fought the best in his weight class for years now and has not once ducked a challenge which is more than can be said for a vast majority of boxers of this generation. He is something we can be proud of over here, one of the p4p best fighters at the moment where he has tested himself time and again. It is unfortunate he is stuck in the same weight class as Ward otherwise he would be dominating the chasing pack. Calzaghe would have lost to Ward but to be honest he would never have fought him anyway judging by his 'legacy'. If people were banned for stupidity on this board you would have had a lifetime one after your first post.

two_tone wrote: If people were banned for stupidity on this board you would have had a lifetime one after your first post.

In all fairness two tone, if such a rule was in place this board would be a three way conversation between Manos, Chris and the captain, so perhaps is not a rule we should rush to introduce.

Calzaghe has always come across as a bit of a scum bag to me if I am being honest. He looked like a leering teenage on Strictly. However, I will readily admit that I have probably got him all wrong. But if I had a choice of a pint with Calzaghe or a pint with Froch, l would choose Froch everytime. I also do not expect either of them to care one way or another!!