Best guy you take Carl Froch to beat

I wanna talk Froch vs Eubank, because he's too far out his depth against Hill.

I can see arguments either way on Eubank vs Froch.

 

How would he fare against 43-year old Hop

 

For me this is a sure win for Froch. Eubank had way too many stinkers and robberies against floatsam for me to think he could beat Froch

 

Watson would have been a good matchup. Lotd of exchange in that one

 

Old bhop would be too inactive. Probably looks good early on, but he no longer had the strength to keep Froch off him

 

Tarver would blow froch on the other hand. Hits too hard and was too accurate

 

I dunno how old Hop was when he beat Pavlik, but that version outboxes Froch.

Froch could beat the circa Kov fight version of Hopkins.

 

Froch would probably beat Ottke, though I don't think its a guarantee.

 

Seriously?

 

Yes. Ottke wasn't a bad technician, despite being written off as a joke nowadays.

I would pick Froch, but I couldn't call it some given.

But yes, I would pick Froch.

 

Come on now. Shitty ass.Otkke gets the bute treatment

 

Froch would batter stevenson

 

Agreed, I'm pretty sure I had Ward winning every round going into the tenth. Then Froch taking the last three, closely. Ward, who's very overrated, thoroughly out-classed Froch.

 

Ward coasted after dominating the first 3/4 of the froch fight. Froch Joch sniffers want to make outlandish claims that it was competitive

 

McCallum wasn't actually that small. The guy had been fighting at 170 in non-title fights for years at that point, which is actually similar to what Froch weights. The guy didn't cut any water weight. I don't think Froch would beat the McCallum which had just beaten Harding. I'm not saying McCallum was a spring chicken, but he undoubtedly still a good fighter.

And the Johnson fight was way closer than it ought to have been.

 

Anyone think Froch'd lose to Rocchigiani?

 

No, I would favor Froch over Rocchigiani.

 

Both Hill and Maske are underrated as far light heavyweights go. Both would outclass Froch.

I generally think Froch would do horribly against all the great-to-very-good-light heavyweights in history.

His odds are better against the middleweights and super middleweights, but even the great middleweights would outclass him, even at a size disparity.

I mean, does anybody honestly think Froch could beat a Hagler or Monzon? Even with size in his favor, they would pick him apart.

Hearns vs Froch is a matchup I've thought about, but when you consider that Taylor was one round away from beating Froch, and when you consider that both Taylor and Groves planted Carl on his ass with right hands, I don't like his odds against Tommy.

 

Its a rare that I defend Eubank, but he was pretty clearly a guy who fought up to the level of his comp.

I have no clue why you're acting like a guy who almost got blasted by George Groves is a lock over Prime Eubank Senior.

Youre putting Froch on some pedestal where he's better than he was.

 

Calzaghe a toss-up? I don't think so. Calzaghe is all wrong for Froch. Faster, more active, more mobile and he could certainly withstand his power. I really don't like Froch's chances against Calzaghe.

 

Calzaghe was extremely physically strong, moreso than Froch - that really presents problems for Carl. Joe would expose Froch's complete lack of infighting.

 

In fairness, Froch could absolutely beat Hearns as well. The guy was out on his ass and spent a good five minutes on queer street from James Kinchen. Froch could definitely one-up that and take it, but I wouldn't expect him to.

I think Froch definitely has the ability to make Eubank work more than he'd like and maybe take a decision, but I think Chris counters him too well.

Honestly, I know Ottke gets shat on a lot, but if he beat Froch, I wouldn't be surprised. It's not like Taylor was leagues above Sven at 168, if at all. Then again, I suppose Froch's aggression could just get the better of Ottke like Johnson and Brewer's was.

Hill and Maske are definitely way too good for Froch. Honestly, Williams and Tiozzo are too good for Froch.

 

I wouldn't totally discount Froch against Hearns, but like you said, its not most likely outcome.

Odds are, Tommy drops him and jabs his head off.

 

On another note, I think Maske gets underrated while Hill gets overrated. I've seen lots of people call Hill an all-time great, a great fighter, a top twenty LHW, one of the best fighters of the eighties, one of the best jabs ever, etc; whereas everyone seems to hate Maske (not for no reason TBF, what a boring cunt) and so doesn't rate him particularly highly.

Hill was just inside my top thirty-five when I made my light-heavyweight top fifty. Nowhere near top twenty. He was definitely better than Maske, but I feel like Maske is underrated, whereas Hill is the opposite. Maske has a couple decent wins, in Rocchigiani, Williams and Barkley (however much stock you put in him at that point could wane or fluctuate, I don't give him much). He was quite a sublimely skilled operator and a very tricky southpaw. He's got that protected German vibe though, like Ottke. That stigma is what causes him to get underrated, but he could really fight. I think Graciano gets a bit underrated too, which adds to Maske's resume.

 

I go back and forth on that one. Seems to be a little too convenient to always pick hearns to fold against pressure fighters. But still its a possibility

 

Ehhh, I can't recall anybody ever calling Hill an ATG. Not on here, anyway. It's possible it's been said on ESB.

Hill was a HOF level fighter, but not an ATG. There's a difference.

In any case, Hill was damn sure a level above Froch.

 

At 175 he was, but nit p4p

 

Huh? Why not P4P?

 

You might not have considered him PFP worthy but from my recollection Hill was on The Ring pfp list until he got crushed by Jones.

 

Just took a quick look and Michalcziewski beat him first... Still, I believe he was considered PFP before that loss.