Carl Froch vs George Groves

megadodge wrote: »

Very surprised to see that. I think he has improved immensely.

The free-swinging slugger that used to take over once he was either clipped himself or when he rocked someone is (or at least seems to be) gone. His defense has improved considerably and his variety of attacking options has to be respected.

I'm one that used to think he was overrated but he has improved to such a degree that I give him a real shout against Froch.

Agree with all of it except with him having a shout against Froch. He hasn't fought at Carl's level and he's been rocked by much much lesser fighters. When Froch lays it on he's in trouble!

walshb wrote: »

That's fair enough. Smarter and more experienced. I do not think he has physically matured and strengthened enough in the past couple of years. This is where I believe he will be found out vs. Froch.

In fairness there are very few fighters out there as strong as Froch and you could be right that it will make a difference, but I still see Groves giving him problems.

Watching Ringside Froch comes across as an even bigger idiot than I previously thought. Groves came across well I thought.

Anyone see Ringside the other night, Groves has got under Froch skin, he really hates Groves, He also comes across as a total and utter arrogant arsehole, basically everyone should get down and lick his balls and pay him respect because he is such a warrior, also said he only lost once, Apparently his defeat to Kessler no longer counts because he won a rematch, honestly think Froch behind it all is probably one of the most arrogant and egotistical boxers around hate the guy, he also has the personality of a plank and the trash talk is painful

Cork_girl wrote: »

Keep this kind of opinion factual and not just a blatant attack on the fighter -within the Forum Charter rules please.

K fair enough mate, probably was to strong but Froch did say he doesnt count his defeat to Kessler as a defeat

Like him or loathe him Froch has always being this way. That's why he is where he is. In time he will be recognised as one of the UK's all time best fighters.

supersean1999 wrote: »

I enjoyed ringside. Groves was clearly trying to rise froch and make him hâte him. I feel this is 1year or 2 fights to soon for groves. But id love to see him beat froch. And finish this overrated plodder.

Bronze at the World amateur Championships, WBC,WBA,IBF,British,Commonwealth & English titles as a pro, wins over Jean Pascal, Jermain Taylor, Andre Dirrell, Arthur Abraham, , Lucien Bute, Mikkel Kessler, Glen Johnson, Brian Magee, Yusaf Mack, Robin Reid, ranked #1 by boxrecs list of active Super-Middleweight, ranked #1 challenger by Ring magazine to champion Andre Ward, and likely just outside of their p4p list.

That's some spectacular achievement for an overrated plodder.

Big Ears wrote: »

Bronze at the World amateur Championships, WBC,WBA,IBF,British,Commonwealth & English titles as a pro, wins over Jean Pascal, Jermain Taylor, Andre Dirrell, Arthur Abraham, , Lucien Bute, Mikkel Kessler, Glen Johnson, Brian Magee, Yusaf Mack, Robin Reid, ranked #1 by boxrecs list of active Super-Middleweight, ranked #1 challenger by Ring magazine to champion Andre Ward, and likely just outside of their p4p list.

That's some spectacular achievement for an overrated plodder.

I know all this. I Also think he is overrated. Schooled by taylor and got Lucky. Beat by dirrell in 90% of sane peoples eyes. Beat by kessler. Beat by ward. Strugged badly against a past it Johnson. He has no choice but to slug. Because Any skilled boxer béats him.

It's a strange one. Froch deserves all the credit he gets but at the same time he's not as good as his legacy suggests, if that makes sense. He has got the most and more out of his career.

supersean1999 wrote: »

I know all this. I Also think he is overrated. Schooled by taylor and got Lucky. Beat by dirrell in 90% of sane peoples eyes. Beat by kessler. Beat by ward. Strugged badly against a past it Johnson. He has no choice but to slug. Because Any skilled boxer béats him.

Schooled ?, sure he lost a lot of the early rounds but come the end he was only losing a close split decision (all judges 106-102, but 2 had Taylor up), and got lucky ?.....please elaborate.

I scored Dirrell a one point winner over him, however to be fair Dirrell should have been disqualified for holding from about as early as the 8th. Now you could say maybe he'd have desisted if the referee took a point earlier (he had been warning him consistently the whole fight), but imo Dirrell should of got DQ'd, as it was one of the worst cases I've ever seen, so imo the scores become immaterial. But even if you want to forget Dirrell's shameful behaviour and just take the fight as scored, Froch fought an insanely talented fighter and made it very, very close. Dirrell imo is one of the greatest wastes of talent in modern boxing, there was even a certain point in time where I feel he may have got the better of Ward. Not now though.

Beat (deservedly imo) in a close fight by Kessler, who's a terrific fighter and he avenged this loss. No shame in that.
Johnson was certainly past his prime, but he was coming off stoppage wins over Yusaf Mack and Allan Green and a close points loss to Tavoris Cloud, he still had something left at that stage.
Beat by Ward ?, and which fighter under 175 lbs wouldn't of been beaten by Ward ?, the guy is arguably the best fighter in the sport, so no shame there again.

Jean Pascal, Jermain taylor, Mikkell Kessler, Andre Dirrell (whether you agree with the decision or not), Lucian Bute, these are all tremendously skilled fighters and yet Froch has managed to do enough to beat them. That puts a flaw in the theory of any skilled fighter beats him, because only 2 have, and 1 of those lost a rematch. So he's not as good as Ward.....big whoop, Ward is a very special fighter, it doesn't mean Froch isn't a fantastic fighter aswell.

richierichballs wrote: »

His best win came against Bute, I thought Bute was going to have it easy with him.
Lucky punch maybe? I dunno. But if they where to have a rematch I'd fancy Bute to take it.

and in which round did Froch land this lucky punch ?, because he battered him with heavy shotr for pretty much the whole fight !
Bute's team also had the option of a rematch which they declined to take, why do you think that is ?, I can't imagine anyone who's seen the first fight would pick Bute in a rematch, it just seems so far removed from logic.


Froch is more skilled than he's given credit for (Hence the Bronze at the World's), he's got a good jab and a very good sense of timing. Although he is a little slow, and he can be quite predictable with his shots. While technically he's certainly not a special fighter, I believe his intangibles make him one, he has a granite chin, he's exceptionally determined, he doesn't believe he can be beaten (even to the last second), able to draw fighters into a tear up when necessary and to add to this he also has good power and excellent stamina. So overall imo he's a top top fighter, and yes the intangibles have played a bigger role than they usually do with other fighters to achieve this but what's wrong with that ?
What's wrong with a fighter who's dedicated himself to the sport so intensely, that believes in himself so strongly having some success ?

walshb wrote: »

I thought Groves came across as far too forced and desperate last night on Ringside. Froch was very calm and poised.

I would agree with that in the most part, but Froch seemed to be seething, certainly not calm, just forcing himself not to errupt (but didn't seem far from it).
I've become fed up of Froch calling himself a warrior, but in the ring I still couldn't get enough of him, the man comes to fight and he'll fight anyone, home or away. That is truly rare in modern day boxing and he should be commended for that, as more fighters like him and the sport would be better off.