Groves v froch II

First topic message reminder :

Was fortunate to meet tony bellew tonight I asked him what he thought about the fight and he said there was nothing wrong with the refs decision and that another 10 secs would have seen a ko. He hunted also that the second fight is pretty much signed for next June/ July as he's fighting on the undercard happy days

hampo171 wrote:Sorry Tunes but who else does Froch fight?

Ward - One sided the first time, more so second time round.
Chavez JR - what's he done at SMW to deserve a shot?

Unless he moves up he doesn't have a credible opponent at SMW.

I agree he does not have allot of options, but he also has a great CV and does not need to prove him self any more, he COULD retire easy with a more than decent record intact. But who has Groves fought to tell Froch that unless he fights him he should retire? If that's how Groves feels then while he is ranked 2 by the WBA why not go over to the states and fight Ward?

For Froch Ward would be another very hard fight and more than likely another loss. But he has lost to him already so it would be a good motivation to win the fight or retire after...

The reality is that Groves has had one world class performance, Froch has had many and has a healthy bank balance... all his fights now are pre retirement bouts.

Calzaghe took on a past his peak Jones rather than a rematch with Hopkins (also past his peak) after a razor close decision, and rather than an all English bout with Froch., because it was best for him.

I am also not convinced Froch is not going to take the rematch.

Steffan wrote:I want a rematch with Ward. Just to see him get beat upon some more

Thats nice of you.

Ward has stated he'd be happy to fight Groves. Don't think it'll happen, but food for thought...

hampo171 wrote:Absolute rubbish Tunes. Groves wasn't given the chance to show his chin was up to the punishment, despite quite clearly still defending himself and throwing back

Froch was taking bombs from the first round... and still coming forward and trading. The first time Groves starts getting hit with clean punches he is on the back foot and holding and running and covering on the ropes...

Im not saying Groves chin is glass, but it most certainly is no way near as solid as Carls despite his "just because Froch as a rep as having a good chin" comment...

How do you think Groves would do against Ward?

Mr Bounce wrote:Ward has stated he'd be happy to fight Groves. Don't think it'll happen, but food for thought...

Great fight, But see Ward stopping Groves, even though Groves has the attributes to make the fight very interesting.

hampo171 wrote:Absolute rubbish Tunes. Groves wasn't given the chance to show his chin was up to the punishment, despite quite clearly still defending himself and throwing back

Precisely the 'allowance' I was referring to. We got to (again) see Froch's amazing chin and powers of recovery. He was given that opportunity. Groves wasn't. He was being bull-rushed and was under pressure - and although people keep saying 'if he took one or two more shots he'd have been done, etc, etc' - but, personally, I'd like the hypothetical nature of this to have been removed through the ref allowing Groves to take those shots. As it was, Groves looked on steady legs and was clear eyed. We'll never know if he would have been legitimately stopped because Groves was given no opportunity to prove he could get out of that situation.

tunes666 wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Absolute rubbish Tunes. Groves wasn't given the chance to show his chin was up to the punishment, despite quite clearly still defending himself and throwing back

Froch was taking bombs from the first round... and still coming forward and trading. The first time Groves starts getting hit with clean punches he is on the back foot and holding and running and covering on the ropes...

Im not saying Groves chin is glass, but it most certainly is no way near as solid as Carls despite his "just because Froch as a rep as having a good chin" comment...  

How do you think Groves would do against Ward?

Yes Froch has a better chin than Groves. He has one of the best chins I've ever seen. I don't see what this has to do with Groves being stopped by the ref the moment he was in any trouble.

Boxtthis wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Absolute rubbish Tunes. Groves wasn't given the chance to show his chin was up to the punishment, despite quite clearly still defending himself and throwing back

Froch was taking bombs from the first round... and still coming forward and trading. The first time Groves starts getting hit with clean punches he is on the back foot and holding and running and covering on the ropes...

Im not saying Groves chin is glass, but it most certainly is no way near as solid as Carls despite his "just because Froch as a rep as having a good chin" comment...  

How do you think Groves would do against Ward?

Yes Froch has a better chin than Groves. He has one of the best chins I've ever seen. I don't see what this has to do with Groves being stopped by the ref the moment he was in any trouble.

Well the point came about while I was referring to the lack of credit Froch has had from the fight and Groves..

As for Groves getting the chance to prove him self, he was in trouble for about 30 seconds, Froch was never in the same position, because his chin is better, and ultimately what won him the fight... Yes Groves could have had a few more moments to try and get over that attack, but that does not change the fact that he was in very deep water.

People seem to use the early stoppage to get away from the fact he was in trouble, as if just because the stoppage was 5 or 10 seconds too early, Froch was not even turning the screw....

You're reading between the lines an awful lot Tunes, nobody has blamed Carl for the stoppage and nobody has said Groves wasn't hurt. What has been said is that Groves should have been given the chance to show he could come through that crisis.

He still had his legs, his eyes were clear and he was throwing back. Foster can't even use the excuse that Groves eyes were rolling back because from his position he couldn't see.

Froch has been given little or no credit because of his post fight antics, simply as that. I am amazed anyone was able to ignore them.

tunes666 wrote:

Boxtthis wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Absolute rubbish Tunes. Groves wasn't given the chance to show his chin was up to the punishment, despite quite clearly still defending himself and throwing back

Froch was taking bombs from the first round... and still coming forward and trading. The first time Groves starts getting hit with clean punches he is on the back foot and holding and running and covering on the ropes...

Im not saying Groves chin is glass, but it most certainly is no way near as solid as Carls despite his "just because Froch as a rep as having a good chin" comment...  

How do you think Groves would do against Ward?

Yes Froch has a better chin than Groves. He has one of the best chins I've ever seen. I don't see what this has to do with Groves being stopped by the ref the moment he was in any trouble.

Well the point came about while I was referring to the lack of credit Froch has had from the fight and Groves..

As for Groves getting the chance to prove him self, he was in trouble for about 30 seconds, Froch was never in the same position, because his chin is better, and ultimately what won him the fight... Yes Groves could have had a few more moments to try and get over that attack, but that does not change the fact that he was in very deep water.

People seem to use the early stoppage to get away from the fact he was in trouble, as if just because the stoppage was 5 or 10 seconds too early, Froch was not even turning the screw....

Well we'll have to disagree on this. I find it really surprising that someone can have such a different interpretation of this fight, but there you go. As for the points you bring up:

* It is in no way a reflection on Froch that the ref stopped the fight early. The man's a juggernaut. But, he was soundly outboxed this night.

* Call me old fashioned, but I don't like fights to be stopped as soon as one guy gets in any form of trouble. Especially if that guy has been dominating. And especially if he has already previously hurt his opponent to a greater degree in that same fight.

* "Froch was not even turning the screw" - this is hypothetical. You could easily say "this was Froch's last barrage, he'd have nothing left after it" or "Groves was taking a round off and would've resumed his domination". This, of course, is the problem with the early stoppage: we'll never know.

Basically we were robbed of a definitive ending. Froch was coming on strong, but it seems such a stretch to assume that he was going to win because he changed the momentum for a period of the fight.

No one can argue that Froch was outboxed for most of the night. But you also have to maintain your self through the whole fight in order to be victorious.... or hope you can get lucky.

I will also disagree that the fight was stopped as soon as he got in trouble as that sounds slightly misleading.. The time from which Groves was hurt till he was stopped was around 30 seconds, which is a fair amount of time to be hurt.

The issue for me was that Groves was still visibly trying to defending him self by covering, trying to smother and throwing hopeful shots back all be it taking more shots in the process. For this reason I agree that the stoppage was early and the Reff could have left it to see if Groves could see it out longer or if Froch landed a few more shots... this I am perfectly happy to admit.

However, I completely don't get some people making out that Froch was not even in the process of applying a finish. People are not saying, "Groves was tough and would have scrapped through to the bell".... or "Froch was tired him self and would have not been able to finish the him".... these would be reasonable arguments and opinions, But to make out that Froch was not applying him self there is pure bias hog wash IMO.

Apart from in rnd 1 where Froch was indeed saved by the bell. In the ninth round for the first time in the fight a fighter was in big risk of being stopped, Yes the reff did not allow enough time for a solid conclusion to be seen, and this could also be seen as robbing Froch of glory.

IMO I did not see enough from Groves or in his retaliation to suggest he would not have been stopped if the reff let it go on for a while longer.... and as he was getting slower and not hitting as hard, I think even if he survived that patch he would have gone through another.

People also forget the Ref was the closest person in the building looking right into Groves face... which merits some significance.

Howard Foster was to the side, staring at the back of Groves head Tunes, even when he stops it he had Groves in a "headlock" rather than getting between the two fighters.

hampo171 wrote:Howard Foster was to the side, staring at the back of Groves head Tunes, even when he stops it he had Groves in a "headlock" rather than getting between the two fighters.

As Broner would say, "Negative"

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

And he did not PUT him in a head lock, this is another fallacy, After trying to push Froch away Froch moved back while he was trying to hit him which made Groves momentum make him stumble forward and to the side towards the Reff, who then put both both arms over the top of Groves, it was when he raised his other arm to wave Froch away that his one arm looked like he had him in a head lock...

Spoiler:

Tunes, headlock was in inverted commas for a reason, as in; it wasn't
deliberate but it happened.

Also, those pictures you've posted there is no way Foster has a view of Groves eyes, certainly not good enough to stop a fight. In one he can't see because of the guard and the other he is at the side, does Foster have some superhero style vision?

Please put the images inside spoiler tags please mate

tunes666 wrote:I completely don't get some people making out that Froch was not even in the process of applying a finish.

I absolutely agree that he was in the process of looking for a finish. Of course he was. I just don't think he got far enough in to that process. Groves was under some pressure, but being under pressure should immediately equal a justified stoppage. Froch was under equal or worse periods of pressure at various points in the fight. They did not amount to a stoppage. Rightfully so.

I think the stoppage was soft relative to the 'average' boxing stoppage. But, I think it was even softer in the context of a) it being a world championship fight, b) how much Froch had been rocked repeatedly earlier.

Taking nothing away from Froch. He fought to the end when others would have given up trying. But, he very much got the benefit of the doubt on this one.

"Taking nothing away from Froch"

You certainly did that. The fight was closer than you listened to, I say again - watch it without Watt influencing you. This wasn't a Hail Mary onslaught, so just get over it.. There's been far worse decisions and far worse stoppages and although I like it here the incessant 'we do this for free' does not make you mother Theresa and give you any more weight to an arguement.

You think the fight hadn't swung. I do. Others do. Wake up and rematch. Froch was walking through his punches and Groves was knackered.

I will bet you 5k Froch would win a rematch. You?

I can't think of a single stoppage in a world title fight that was worse than that, you have the Chavez/Taylor fight but that was contentious for other reasons.

Izzi, can you explain the " we do this for free" part of that post as I can't see what relevance it has.

Izzi wrote:I will bet you 5k Froch would win a rematch. You?

I have never had, and will never have, that much money going spare for anything at all, never mind a bet, so my stake will have to be £34, my moderator's badge, the HMV voucher I just got for Christmas and JBW's sister, who I believe he is willing to sell for the right price.

That still only brings you to £50 Chris.

88Chris05 wrote:

Izzi wrote:I will bet you 5k Froch would win a rematch. You?

I have never had, and will never have, that much money going spare for anything at all, never mind a bet, so my stake will have to be £34, my moderator's badge, the HMV voucher I just got for Christmas and JBW's sister, who I believe he is willing to sell for the right price.

We'll possibly have to sit through Froch looking a million dollars against the walking punchbag son of a legend first, you beat the son of a legend and you become a legend.

88Chris05 wrote:

Izzi wrote:I will bet you 5k Froch would win a rematch. You?

I have never had, and will never have, that much money going spare for anything at all, never mind a bet, so my stake will have to be £34, my moderator's badge, the HMV voucher I just got for Christmas and JBW's sister, who I believe he is willing to sell for the right price.

I'll take that bet Izzi - but i'll pay you in warrior points.

Boxtthis wrote: Froch was under equal or worse periods of pressure at various points in the fight. They did not amount to a stoppage. Rightfully so.

Completly not true. The first round knock down was the only chance Groves had of stopping Froch and the only time he had him badly hurt.... at no other point in the fight was Froch in as much trouble as Groves was in the 9th. Fact.

hampo171 wrote:

Please put the images inside spoiler tags please mate

No worries...

tunes666 wrote:

Boxtthis wrote: Froch was under equal or worse periods of pressure at various points in the fight. They did not amount to a stoppage. Rightfully so.

Completly not true.  The first round knock down was the only chance Groves had of stopping Froch and the only time he had him badly hurt.... at no other point in the fight was Froch in as much trouble as Groves was in the 9th. Fact.

Ok, well if it's a fact then.......

Wow this is still going on, its two people against the entire board....

It's the latest edition to the list of never-ending v2 debates, BF88. We've had Curry and his unjust, weight-drained defeat at the hands of Honeyghan, we've had Duran being rolled like a drunk, we've had Marciano being either a) an all-time great Heavyweight, or b) a complete bum who'd have lost to Laila Ali, never mind Muhammad, and now we have the Froch-Groves stoppage.

Although at least those other debates all had decent arguments on either side. On the other hand, we all know the Froch-Groves stoppage was rubbish!

88Chris05 wrote: we all know the Froch-Groves stoppage was rubbish!

Apparently we don't all know it. Didn't you see tunes easily refute that argument with his stone cold facts above?

Apparently we've surpassed the need for definitive endings to boxing matches and now we can just speculate as to what would have happened hypothetically: "Froch had him in trouble and was 'going to win' anyway". Let's not worry to much about what actually happened, eh? Give me strength.

I'm mighty tired of this one now too.

Here here!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2534799/JEFF-POWELL-Froch-remains-Britains-best-2014-year-Khan-surpasses-him.html

He's got Pacquiao at number two, we can't take his opinion seriously.

That is one of the worst lists for both domestic and international fighters I have ever seen. Really really terrible.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:He's got Pacquiao at number two, we can't take his opinion seriously.

of course, Pacquiao is a very poor fighter.   

Shocking to have froch no 1 . Dont think ive ever such a schooling of a champion who was predicted to win so comfortably. Froch looked a terrible boxer that night and groves looked sublime. Jeff powel can not have watched the fight must have just seen the result.

lets see your lists then?

rycoys wrote:Shocking to have froch no 1 . Dont think ive ever such a schooling of a champion who was predicted to win so comfortably.  Froch looked a terrible boxer that night and groves looked sublime.  Jeff powel can not have watched the fight must have just seen the result.  

I think it just goes to show, if he can be so poor yet still win the fight... Lets not forget that Groves did not win either, Far from it.

tunes666 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:He's got Pacquiao at number two, we can't take his opinion seriously.

of course, Pacquiao is a very poor fighter.   

The moment he was laid to sleep by Marquez he no longer had any claim to be among the best five in the world and since that fight he's only beaten Rios, hardly p4p number two worthy.

rycoys wrote:Shocking to have froch no 1 . Dont think ive ever such a schooling of a champion who was predicted to win so comfortably.  Froch looked a terrible boxer that night and groves looked sublime.  Jeff powel can not have watched the fight must have just seen the result.  

You can't have watched many fights then, Dawson was predicted to beat Stevenson quite easily for instance.

The whole point is he did nt deserve the win he got . The stpppage was a farce and he got outclassed for 8 rounds, he looked awful . If the list was for chins/stamina then yeh he'd no 1 hands down he took such punishment.

One punch ko ? a bit different!!

Pacquiao is easily one of the top 5 boxers in the world. He lost to Marquez. Big deal.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:He's got Pacquiao at number two, we can't take his opinion seriously.

of course, Pacquiao is a very poor fighter.   

The moment he was laid to sleep by Marquez he no longer had any claim to be among the best five in the world and since that fight he's only beaten Rios, hardly p4p number two worthy.

only before that he could arguably have been no 1.

rycoys wrote:The whole point is he did nt deserve the win he got . The stpppage was a farce and he got outclassed for 8 rounds, he looked awful . If the list was for chins/stamina then yeh he'd no 1 hands down he took such punishment.

not a farce, just a bit early. Just because he took some punishment up till then it does not mean he did not have a right to then go and win the fight, which he did, all be it with a bit of controversy in a questionable 10 or so seconds that was prevented from being...

So I take it you think Groves should be p4p UK no 1?, or higher than Froch?, even though it was the only fight he has had?

I'd also find a place for Manny in the top 5. At WW he is still by far and away the biggest test for Floyd which is why we still have the fight being discussed.

We need to get out the mindset of moving people down a huge number of places based on one defeat.

I think If Manny is as good as he was before his hick up, and its not a case of him being on the slide then I think he is certainy not unworthy of taking that second spot, admittedly he must being going by past rep a little to put him second, not sure why he is above Ward.

As for British Boxers, I am not sure who has done any better, There is only 1 boxer who has proven to beat Froch and that's Ward, who is clearly a Special fighter... He avenged the Kessler fight and no one else has been able to beat him.

I think Haye may be a better boxer but is way to inactive to claim top spot. Khan could do if he pulls his act together..

One way or another Pacquiao has lost two of his last four fights, if you want to credit him with the win over Bradley you also have to credit Marquez for the win in their third fight. It's been over three years since he looked at his sparkling best and is living of past glories far too much to be considered number two. Mayweather, Ward, Rigondeaux and Bradley all deserve to be above him now so maybe he slots in at number five but second is just ridiculous.

To suggest it was a hick up is fairly insulting to Marquez who over the course of three fights had shown he has Pacquiao's number.

With these things we can't consider what happened five years ago, we need to look at the here and now.

Pound for pound is a load of balls. People argue this crap like its some kind of science.

Pacquiao is not one of the top 5 boxers in the world, what codswallop.

Better boxers, right now.

1) Mayweather - don't dispute it.
2) Andre Ward
3) Bradley (makes the Marquez win over Pacquiao look a little bad for Pacquiao now doesn't it?)
4) Rigondeaux
5) Wladimir Klitschko

Should I keep going?

6) Martinez
7) JMM

You don't half talk some silly nonsense sometimes CW

Also, that article you linked Tunes - thats gotta be some sort of wind-up. Tyson Fury at #3? Who's he fought then? Khan at 2? What so beating Milina and Diaz suddenly makes you better than actual title holders like Frampton?

Stupid list made by someone Froch has paid off. Or lent his wife to for a night.

Wladimir Klitschko a better boxer than Pacquiao, you must be a comedian.

Martinez and Bradley better my ass.

Bradley was soundly beaten by Manny. Whilst the win over Marquez is a good one, the way he struggled with Prov means he can't be above Manny for me.

I've got Manny at 4. Perfectly reasonable position.

I don't see how anyone can have Manny inside a top 5 and still have a straight face. Manny did not "soundly beat" Bradley. I feel it was a contentious decision but if you're telling me you can't see why Bradley may have taken it then I'm assuming you watched it with the commentary on where they describe punches that never happen. I think Manny won, don't get me wrong, but Bradley went to war with Prov on purpose to show he could do it and still won - also taking out Marquez more convincingly that Pacquiao. Silly having a man who has lost 2 of his last 4 fights in a top 5 where the others have far superior records.

Yes CW, Wlad above Manny. I think you may be on drugs. Is Manny the current undisputed champion in his weight class? Has Manny been undefeated for 10 years? Has he completely and utterly outclassed every person he's faced in the last 10 years?

Well damn. I must be a "comedian"