Groves or Degale v Clev in the future?

First topic message reminder :

We have all heard it said that Groves v Froch might happen, a fight that is more likely now that George is with Hearn. Personally, I don't like Froch v Groves. The timing isn't there for me, because Froch would flatten him now, is 35 and really should be retired by the time Groves is ready. But Groves v Clev (providing Clev makes the switch from Warren, and even if he doesn't) what about that?

Or how about Degale v Clev? Clev should consider Ch5 as an option, simply for the terrestrial angle. Now, again I am assuming it contractual possible for Clev to jump ship, but if he can, how about Degale? Degale is ambitious, which I like, and both styles make for an exciting fight: Both have good engines, fast hands and throw in combos. But both lack power and have terrible defence. So why not build that? A big, British money spinning fight on SKY or ch5. Come on Clev, show some ambition and leave Fishy Face.

Groves, Degale and Clev are of the same boxing era. all are British, and are coming up at same rate. Yes Clev is a paper champ, but forget that, he has fought nobody. I would love to see Degale or Groves fight Clev in the future at LH or at a CW that suits all parties. How likely is this to happen?

TheMackemMawler wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:I think they're both capable of beating each other, which is what makes it interesting.

Great minds and all that....again!

As long as we not talking about China.......

Naturally

TopHat24/7 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

hampo171 wrote:The only other person I've heard call that fight a robbery was Frank Warren straight after the final bell. Are you Frank Warren Tunes?

Most of the boxing pro's think Degale won that fight, and Frank Warren backed up his views that Degale won it even after Degale left him and he was looking after Groves... Groves had xmas early and would lose a rematch, watch this space.

Now you just sound like Gordy

Groves came in with a better game plan and executed it whereas DeGale couldn't adapt (if he was that much better a boxer he would have). Given DeGale had a losing record to Groves coming into the fight and it was undeniably the toughest fight of his career there is no excuse to say JDG just came in unprepared or took Groves lightly.

And to say "Groves had xmas early and would lose a rematch" is just pure nut-huggery. Same way everyone wrote GG off before they thought and look what happened, first time anyone asked real questions of JDG and he was a fish out of water.

GG did have a better game plan I agree, he came in with more respect than Degale did. But to say Degale did not adapt is rubbish... He came in with a swagger and for sure he soon realized he was in a fight and Groves took a couple rounds in a row from about the 3rd 4th... then Degale clearly did adapt and started to come back into it taking more of the latter rounds.

I blame his corner who seemed to be happy to have him over confident.

When a boxer boxes on the back foot, for me they have to win clearly. They need to land clean and crisp and make it count. Groves landed about 2 flush shots on Degale the whole fight. Ok I would say a "robbery" is a strong word as there were so many close rounds and it was scrappy. But anyone who can watch that fight through and at the end come to the conclusion that the best fighter won for me is looking with a very anti Degale mind set.

Or it could be that you're looking at it with a very pro Degale mindset.

I know what option my money is on.

I was actually very critical of JD after the fight and felt he only had him self to blame, over confident, immature and got a rude awakening .. I have a soft spot for him as I think gold medalists carry a weight of expectations and pressure but people think because groves fought well and made it close then he done enough to win, while I think if you run a fight close then yes these results happen bit to say Groves outboxed him lik all the haters said is tosh..
Everyone knows degale has his haters ..

I genuinely fail to see how DeGale's 'haters' (God I hate that term) have distorted everyone's view of the fight as you suggest, Tunes. I'm literally yet to see anyone who hasn't agreed that it was a seriously, seriously close fight regardless of which way they had it. Can every single person only be saying that out of hatred for DeGale? I don't think so, personally.

You say that, in your opinion, whoever boxes primarily off the back foot needs to do more than the aggressor to earn the decision. That's your prerogative, but at the end of the day the rule book for scoring says nothing of the sort. Whoever does the better boxing in the round (and boxing includes the aspect of defense, ring generalship, effective rather than blanket aggression etc where they are prevalent) wins it, whoever wins most rounds wins the verdict, and that's all there is to it.

There is a degree of subjectivity in scoring, of course, but that's the point. For everyone such as yourself who favours the man going forward constantly, there will be another who discards that and takes other factors in to account.

I don't take any exception to you thinking that DeGale won it (provided you acknowledge that it was only by a shade) but I do think it's ridiculous to claim that the result was an injustice, a 'robbery' or that anyone who disagrees with your card is only doing so for childish reasons.

But also when a boxer throws a punch that brushes the guys ear the he should not win the round ..

tunes666 wrote:But also when a boxer throws a punch that brushes the guys ear the he should not win the round ..

In some cases it knocks them out. Ask Price.

I had it 120-108 to Groves. The ear brushing shots each round swung it.