Froch Vs Groves - Ringside

First topic message reminder :

Is anyone watching Ringside?

Froch is coming across very nervous, whereas Groves seems extremely calm, reassured and knowledgable.

Small Time wrote:For me Grooves will have to employ the same, but ultimately better executed, plan as he did against De gale, but I really don't it happening for the full 12. In fact I see him walking on to one and being stopped around 6 or 7 while being up on the judges score cards.

This is how I see it. Groves will win rounds with movement and accurate punching. But, Froch is so iron-willed and relentless that he'll catch him up eventually. Froch is also skilled and rangy enough to take his share of rounds. I expect a Froch UD with Groves escaping rough moments, or Froch to stop him through accumulation of punches.

Check out Froch's hand at the 25 second mark of this video. WTF!

Haha!

A Froch win would be better for British boxing as both will still have a future rather than just the one. Froch will effectively be finished at the top level if he loses but Groves has plenty of time regroup if he loses.

Can't see Groves doing it - unless he is hiding some serious ability. Losing one's trainer - even a trainer as overrated as Booth - cannot be helpful just months before a fight. Even though he has a style similar to that which has caused Froch trouble in the past - Taylor, Dirrell - I do not believe that he is good enough to implement that game plan over 12 rounds.

As always, I would be delighted to be proved wrong as it would make for a great fight - but Froch is excellent at cutting off the ring and I can't see it going into the late rounds. Froch hits harder than Anderson.

I'm with you on the KO Sean, I see this going 6 or 7 rounds at most. Groves can take a fair whacking but I'm not sure Froch will be interested in letting this go to points.

This is a huge step up in class for Groves,nothing he has will stop Froch coming forward,for me this will be a beat down,don't be surprised if Groves corner have to rescue him from the punishment Froch dishes out rather than the ref.

Groves has done nothing to deserve this title shot,you walk before you can run never been in with a top ten fighter let alone Froch.

Who that Froch hasn't faced is more deserving? There's Stieglitz but I doubt that fight would ever happen. Groves does hold a win over the world ranked number ten, for me being ranked 5 show's he deserves the fight.

I am ok with the fight being made, and those who say Groves should have more fights may have a point, but this is fair timing for both, IMO. Like Jab, Ican only see one outcome. Groves being so gobby beforehand is only going to make Froch go for the kill even more

Groves being gobby by just stating the obvious.

How about everyone go back and watch the Ward vs Froch face off for showtime at the time and watch a fighter really be gobby.

Having watched the Ringside show last night what did we expect, to Groves to bask in Froch's wonderfulness!!??

Of course Groves needs an extra advantage in this fight and trying to wind Froch up is the only realisic way he is going to achieve this.

I have no problem at all watching him try to bait Froch and I think it would be a borefest if we just listen to a whole build up of Froch tell us how great he is and Groves agreeing with him.

The fact is Groves isnt being gobby. He is just reminding the public who arent aware, that Froch has been beat before and can be beat again.

I have sat and watched Groves' last few fights and his speed, power and awkward at times style will definatly see him involved well in this fight (I feel anyway).

Froch's win over Bute still seems to be creating boners for a lot of people. His fights after have seen him fight some no mark and go life and death with a finished Kessler.

Watch the 11th round of that Kessler fight and you see Froch is nearly gone. Legs turned to rubber and was seriously hurt.

Now if that what a tired, old Kessler can do then I am confident that Groves can catch him with the kind of shot that had Paul Smith doing an impression of Enzo Mac.

Now deep down I reckon Froch will win on points. But with a few hairy moments along the way. 7-5 maybe in rounds.

Froch is old and not at all known for his speed. Groves is young and known very well for his speed.

Both have power. I don't think Groves will stop Froch in a month of Sundays but I do reckon he has the power to knock him off his stride and win rounds.

Just my take anyway. Ya never know, this may end up in one of those "worst ever prediction" style threads

I've watched the Kessler rematch a few times and can't say I've seen this bit in the 11th when he was out on his feet, he simply didn't happen. People try and play down his win over Kessler saying he was finished, he wasn't, a finished fighter doesn't fight at that tempo against Froch.

I think groves will pull off a ward type display against froch.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Just my take anyway. Ya  never know, this may end up in one of those "worst ever prediction" style threads

It's good to keep all of your predictions together.

There was a shot in the 11th of the Kessler fight that had Froch doing the chicken dance for a split second however he recovered superbly well, certainly wasn't out on his feet.

Groves has decent power and has the style to make you walk on to punches and I expect that to happen a few times in this fight. Nobody knows just how good Groves is because he's beaten everyone put in front of him, some in superb style. Was interesting when Froch tried to slate Calzaghe by saying he moved up rather than face him ignoring that he moved up and became a two weight world champ, Groves is spot on when he says he didn't have to cheap talk his way in to this fight like Froch tried to do with JC.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Who that Froch hasn't faced is more deserving? There's Stieglitz but I doubt that fight would ever happen. Groves does hold a win over the world ranked number ten, for me being ranked 5 show's he deserves the fight.

Ranked No 5 by beating who,used to be this daft thing in boxing once upon a time, called title eliminators

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Groves being gobby by just stating the obvious.

How about everyone go back and watch the Ward vs Froch face off for showtime at the time and watch a fighter really be gobby.

Having watched the Ringside show last night what did we expect, to Groves to bask in Froch's wonderfulness!!??

Of course Groves needs an extra advantage in this fight and trying to wind Froch up is the only realisic way he is going to achieve this.

I have no problem at all watching him try to bait Froch and I think it would be a borefest if we just listen to a whole build up of Froch tell us how great he is and Groves agreeing with him.

The fact is Groves isnt being gobby. He is just reminding the public who arent aware, that Froch has been beat before and can be beat again.

I have sat and watched Groves' last few fights and his speed, power and awkward at times style will definatly see him involved well in this fight (I feel anyway).

Froch's win over Bute still seems to be creating boners for a lot of people. His fights after have seen him fight some no mark and go life and death with a finished Kessler.

Watch the 11th round of that Kessler fight and you see Froch is nearly gone. Legs turned to rubber and was seriously hurt.

Now if that what a tired, old Kessler can do then I am confident that Groves can catch him with the kind of shot that had Paul Smith doing an impression of Enzo Mac.

Now deep down I reckon Froch will win on points. But with a few hairy moments along the way. 7-5 maybe in rounds.

Froch is old and not at all known for his speed. Groves is young and known very well for his speed.

Both have power. I don't think Groves will stop Froch in a month of Sundays but I do reckon he has the power to knock him off his stride and win rounds.

Just my take anyway. Ya  never know, this may end up in one of those "worst ever prediction" style threads

 
He is being gobby. All that stuff at the end about Froch going to cry, that's called being gobby, and usually when you are gobby you get a slap. I don't mind it, it's part of it, but he will get splatted for it. Count on it.

Who is more deserving then?

He's ranked 5th because his win over Degale and unbeaten record is better than that of anyone below him. Of the top 7 seven aside from himself there is only Stieglitz and Groves he's not faced.

Froch is fighting like a younger man in his prime rather than a 36 year old,nobody knows how good Groves is because he hasn't fought anyone.

Froch has fought two limited guys back to back If we are honest...........

He didn't have to find Bute or Kessler...........So he may look like a man in his prime but looks can be deceiving.......

Groves has to make him miss and fight at a good pace..........establish a jab

Hope he can.........Hope he wins.

You can say all that but you have to consider his other options to make a comparison. Groves aside from Stieglitz is his best option, a fight with the latter is a no go as I imagine both think they'll get screwed giving up home advantage.

Kessler is a good fighter. Watch him against Calzaghe, two fighters at their peak.

A ring worn Kessler was good enough to beat Froch in the first fight.

Kessler is in the Top 3 SMW's of all time.

So Kessler is above Ward, Calzaghe and Froch ????

shut up

Jones, Calzaghe and Ward are the top three for me with Kessler and Froch interchangeable behind them. Kessler was definitely ring worn by the time of the rematch, the Green fight showed us that much but I don't think he'd regressed too far from his best on their first fight Strongy. It easy to dismiss the super middleweights because generally it's dominated by europeans with Jones and Ward being the exceptions. If Kessler or Froch were american then their stock would be far higher.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Jones, Calzaghe and Ward are the top three for me with Kessler and Froch interchangeable behind them. Kessler was definitely ring worn by the time of the rematch, the Green fight showed us that much but I don't think he'd regressed too far from his best on their first fight Strongy. It easy to dismiss the super middleweights because generally it's dominated by europeans with Jones and Ward being the exceptions. If Kessler or Froch were american then their stock would be far higher.

Like Roberto Duran's.............Perhaps the fact they got outclassed by Ward has something to do with their stock..

Calzaghe's was high enough..

Lets change that to american or hispanic then, european fighters don't get the recognition they deserve over the pond on the whole. Froch, Bute and Kessler are all world class boxers but unlike their counterparts a loss seems to mean a whole lot more, not being promoted by GBP or TR doesn't help either.

You call Kessler an ordinary stand up european when he isn't at all.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So Kessler is above Ward, Calzaghe and Froch ????

shut up

He's ahead of Froch you bumhole.

He isn't very good is he..........doesn't move his head........Just a well built guy who's overachieved..He's steve collins in the 21st century.

Froch however is talented.........

Pick Eubank and Benn to beat kessler handily.

Strongback wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So Kessler is above Ward, Calzaghe and Froch ????

shut up

He's ahead of Froch you bumhole.

No he isn't..........and stop with the first grade insults...

He is actually pretty damn good, a brilliant jab, good power, granite chin and good footwork, he's just unfortunate that he's had to face two prime great fighters in Calzaghe and Ward.

He's so blessed wonder how he lost to ward..

Calzaghe was in his prime..............Okay Mate.

Froch and Kessler are pretty much neck and neck, Froch has the better overall record but i'd give Kessler a slight edge in their head to heads. I feel he beat a better version of Froch than Froch did of Kessler.

I thought Froch won twice............As did many others.......

First one was contentious..........Second was Froch by three at least........

You're a fan boy.

I thought Hearns had a brilliant jab........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So Kessler is above Ward, Calzaghe and Froch ????

shut up

He's ahead of Froch you bumhole.

No he isn't..........and stop with the first grade insults...

Don't tell me to shut up then.


Kessler is a better fighter than Froch. He proved that in the first fight although he was ring worn.

The Kessler that fought Calzaghe would rip Froch apart.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He's so blessed wonder how he lost to ward..

Calzaghe was in his prime..............Okay Mate.

He lost because Ward is simply better, it doesn't mean he's an ordinary fighter, Dawson isn't ordinary but lost far more decisevely.

Calzaghe was in red hot form when he faced Kessler coming off two of his best wins and at 34 he was better than he'd ever been, his work rate was at an all time high and he had the experience to fight a multitude of ways.

Calzaghe was 35.........Had been at the top ten years and was coming to the end.........

After that was the stinker v Hoppo and senile Jones and both times he was decked..

35 isn't your prime..........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I thought Froch won twice............As did many others.......

First one was contentious..........Second was Froch by three at least........

You're a fan boy.

I thought Hearns had a brilliant jab........

You think Froch won the first fight based on what exactly? His inability to follow up on his good instead standing there and admiring it, inbetween getting outworked and outpunched yes he won, the fight is contentious in Froch's head and his head only.

You telling me the first fight wasn't contentious ??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Calzaghe was 35.........Had been at the top ten years and was coming to the end.........

After that was the stinker v Hoppo and senile Jones and both times he was decked..

35 isn't your prime..........

When was he ever better than he was against Kessler and Lacy then Truss, scraping past Reid, getting dropped by Mitchell or was it when he was fighting a host of nobodies?

Hopkins was at his absolute best at 37 when he was schooling Trinidad, age doesn't mean a lot when you can still perform.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You telling me the first fight wasn't contentious ??

Not in the slightest, the only contentious think about it was Tillemans scorecard but not the result.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Calzaghe was 35.........Had been at the top ten years and was coming to the end.........

After that was the stinker v Hoppo and senile Jones and both times he was decked..

35 isn't your prime..........

Watch the fight. It's Calzaghe's greatest performance.

It's clear you haven't watched the fight. Maybe you should watch it and then you wouldn't be coming across as so clueless.


Watch the fight, it's well worth it.

He was great against Lacy.........That was 21 months before Kessler........

Holmes was great against Cooney 35 months before Spinks...and very good against an unbeaten Witherspoon 23 months before spinks.......Holmes/Calzaghe were both of a similar age....

Lacy is irrelevant to Kessler........You age quicker in your 30s boxing history tells us that.

Generalising doesn't quite work when we're talking about an individual seeing as we're all different, comparing Calzaghe against Kessler to him against Reid, he looked better at 34 than at 26.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He was great against Lacy.........That was 21 months before Kessler........

Holmes was great against Cooney 35 months before Spinks...and very good against an unbeaten Witherspoon 23 months before spinks.......Holmes/Calzaghe were both of a similar age....

Lacy is irrelevant to Kessler........You age quicker in your 30s boxing history tells us that.

Watch the fight. Calzaghe is amazing. He must have thrown 80 odd punches per round. It's a proper battle, Calzaghe's quality wins through. Joe never looked better.

Generalising doesn't help your argument.........That's for sure.......

Look I've been away all week.........I'm tired so we'll agree to disagree...........

Brilliant jabs belonged to people like Tommy Hearns.......

Goodnight..

I can't stand generalisations in general, all it does is use the normal to support a claim that can be countered by the abnormal.

Seanusarrilius wrote:

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Groves being gobby by just stating the obvious.

How about everyone go back and watch the Ward vs Froch face off for showtime at the time and watch a fighter really be gobby.

Having watched the Ringside show last night what did we expect, to Groves to bask in Froch's wonderfulness!!??

Of course Groves needs an extra advantage in this fight and trying to wind Froch up is the only realisic way he is going to achieve this.

I have no problem at all watching him try to bait Froch and I think it would be a borefest if we just listen to a whole build up of Froch tell us how great he is and Groves agreeing with him.

The fact is Groves isnt being gobby. He is just reminding the public who arent aware, that Froch has been beat before and can be beat again.

I have sat and watched Groves' last few fights and his speed, power and awkward at times style will definatly see him involved well in this fight (I feel anyway).

Froch's win over Bute still seems to be creating boners for a lot of people. His fights after have seen him fight some no mark and go life and death with a finished Kessler.

Watch the 11th round of that Kessler fight and you see Froch is nearly gone. Legs turned to rubber and was seriously hurt.

Now if that what a tired, old Kessler can do then I am confident that Groves can catch him with the kind of shot that had Paul Smith doing an impression of Enzo Mac.

Now deep down I reckon Froch will win on points. But with a few hairy moments along the way. 7-5 maybe in rounds.

Froch is old and not at all known for his speed. Groves is young and known very well for his speed.

Both have power. I don't think Groves will stop Froch in a month of Sundays but I do reckon he has the power to knock him off his stride and win rounds.

Just my take anyway. Ya  never know, this may end up in one of those "worst ever prediction" style threads

 
He is being gobby. All that stuff at the end about Froch going to cry, that's called being gobby, and usually when you are gobby you get a slap. I don't mind it, it's part of it, but he will get splatted for it. Count on it.

He stated the obvious. Froch did actually sound like he was going to cry. And the close ups of him blinking repeatedly added to that point. Carl didn't seem himself. It was weird you have to admit that.

And Hammer, Hampo (as I stated) mentioned Froch went bendy legged so I didn't just imagine that. Watch it again if you didn't see it the other times you watched it. I agree with you Hampt he recovered well, but in the post I wrote I did say I don't think Groves will KO Carl, but I reckon Groves can make Carl's legs go in the same manner if he catches him clean and Froch is hardly known to avoid shots. He takes big hits all the time. I was pointing out that if Groves can do what Kessler did in the 11th then it will surely bag him the round in which he does it. Thats it.

Every round will matter in this fight I reckon.

No harm but just to go back on the crying point, I'm not hearing any complains about Froch calling Groves smelly breath in the other pressers or are warriors not considered "gobby"? Both of them have been throwing cheap snipes. But I guess the Trenchtown Warrior gets a pass. Sweet

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Froch has fought two limited guys back to back If we are honest...........

He didn't have to find Bute or Kessler...........So he may look like a man in his prime but looks can be deceiving.......

Groves has to make him miss and fight at a good pace..........establish a jab

Hope he can.........Hope he wins.

The only man to outclass Froch is Ward but Wards done that to every fighter his come up against.
Froch has fought superbly in his last 2 fights and many tipped Bute to beat Froch.Groves should have been testing himself against world class fighters before stepping in with Froch.

Nico the gman wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Froch has fought two limited guys back to back If we are honest...........

He didn't have to find Bute or Kessler...........So he may look like a man in his prime but looks can be deceiving.......

Groves has to make him miss and fight at a good pace..........establish a jab

Hope he can.........Hope he wins.

The only man to outclass Froch is Ward but Wards done that to every fighter his come up against.
Froch has fought superbly in his last 2 fights and many tipped Bute to beat Froch.Groves should have been testing himself against world class fighters before stepping in with Froch.

Too be fair for 90% of the fight Jermaine Taylor utterly outclassed Froch much more than even Ward did, Ward completely controlled him without breaking sweat, in the first fight when both were at their peak i thought Kessler clearly beat him and if the Dirrell fight had been anywhere else in the world Froch may well have lost. He is a very good fighter who has exciting fights but he is definitely beatable and i will not be surprised at all if Groves walks away with the belt.

Taylor dominated the first six rounds after which it was all Froch, the fight was well and truly in the balance going into the 12th round. A myth seems to have been created about that fight that the knockout came out of the blue which it had not, it had been coming for rounds.

That does not sound like the fight i watched Hammersmith. Taylor was up by 4 rounds on 2 scorecards at the time of stoppage and Froch somehow was winning on the third judges. I watched it again a few days ago and i had Taylor up by 5 going into the final rounds and that was giving Froch a couple of rounds that could have gone either way. Watch it again mate he was outboxed in every department and only his amazing will to win and Taylors stupidity saved him that night.