Fight night

First topic message reminder :

Afternoon all,

Really looking forward to Crolla v Burns tonight. I'm a fan of both men and can see this being a great contest. Both gentlemen of the sport but both always go for it. I'm hoping for a Burns win but hope both have somewhere to go after this.

Thoughts?

Cheers.

Andrew Selby was excruciating.He deliberately took shots to the head although he was in a tight contest.Can see him coming a cropper one day,he was up by three in Woodhall's card,and I think that was an accurate reflection of the fight...

There was no sound on in the pub I watched it. I had Crolla handily ahead in the first half but thought Burns came back well and thought Crolla had nothing left to give.

Probably had it to Crolla but a couple of rounds but wouldn't have called it a robbery if it had been given as a draw.

EX7EY wrote:Today at 9:33 am
by milkyboy
Gotta love froch’s scoring. Realises he’s in danger of scoring a draw when everyone else has Crolla ahead, so despite commentating on burns good work throughout the last he gives it to crolla to make his card look more in line.

I thought that, he had Crolla 1 round up going into the last and despite burns clearly winning the round he magically has Crolla '1 or 2 up' after the last.

They need to sort themselves out with this the sky commentary team. Similar theme in a lot of fights. I'd rather them not bother scoring and just commentate.

Problem is the commentary is not much better than their scoring, thankfully Darren Barker wasn't near the microphone who is single handedly the worst ive heard. They should adopt HBO's method where the commentators don't run a scorecard but have a ex judge or a expert of some sort to run their scorecard after each round (aka Lederman)

I had it Crolla 117-111 I thought Burns looked awful but he has done for the past few fights.

Cheers, Rodders

I thought the sky team was getting better, whatsisname (Jim Watt lite) seemed to be being honest and direct at one point and the pundits seemed to be giving honest opinions on opponents and fighters, now it's slipped back into seemingly following a script although still not as bad as Khan trying to justify the judges scoring in germany.

Don't think Burns has quite had it yet and he could do a few decent domestic scraps especially in Scotland. He's done a hell of a lot with what most people thought/think was minimum talent so he'll always have my respect. Gutted he went on a downward spiral after leaving Warren and then to be made bankrupt by him as well was even worse (although we still don't konw the full story of that one)

I still don't see how people had it so one sided in favour of Crolla to be honest. But i am in the minority so fair enough. To me a lot of Crolla's work was being blocked or hitting Burns gloves. A lot of Crolla's work wasn;t clean IMO which makes it hard to score, at least for me. I just felt Burns actually did the cleaner work in a lot of the rounds, especially down the stretch. Crolla just plodded forward with his usual high gaurd and got caught with clean shots often, hence why his face was a bloody mess at the end.

Burns is obviously well past his peak but he can still mix it at domestic/euro level for a litle bit yet if he wants to.

Don't see the point in Crolla trying again at World level, other than for the cash, which is fair enough. Hearn gonna feed him to Luke Campbell next I feel, which could spell bad news for Crolla.

I had it 116-114. Lot of tight rounds (scored two even).

Tony Sims gets his fighters fit but technically, they're not the best. Crolla won by being more compact and tucking up a bit tighter.

Comes back to that scoring debate we had recently? What’s effective aggression. Crolla looked like the one trying to make the fight, threw more, but much of it was blocked. Do you score for burns defence or crolla’s aggression? What in theory you should and what people do aren’t necessarily the same. People tend to lean to the aggressor if it’s tight.

I only caught the last four rounds and didn’t think there was a whole lot in them (though the last was a burns round). I look for clean shots and there didn’t seem much in those rounds to me. If that was burns best period though, I think i’d Struggle to score for him.

Didn't see much of Burns clean shots to be honest , I thought he look pretty awful as he did against Indongo and against the kid who Hatton trains. Crolla wasn't great by any stretch but he won the fight and without dispute for me.

Cheers, Rodders

Crolla definitely won - there's no argument for Burns.

Yes Milky, Crolla nicked most of the first six (though, none of them were easy to score).

Everything was fairly even, however, when they exchanged, Crolla tucked up better, whereas Burns was a tad more open. Neither was the aggressor (both are natural counter punchers).

Clinical knockout from Eubank deserved to be seen by a wider audience that one surely but the Sauerland’s greed what can you do the Turk took his defeat like a man cruel game isn’t it one minute you’re top of the world and the next, is Eubank hitting harder at 68 has he found his true weight? Can’t wait for Groves/Cox

It's not as if Yildirim was a worthwhile opponent though is it.

You’re a comedy account Lions whose sole purpose seems to be to wind posters up

Off you go...

Yildirim was tailored but it was still a class knockout

How is it a wind up to state that Yildirim had fought nobody and it's a bit premature getting excited over that stoppage.

It was a quality stoppage I know you don’t like Eubank but give a little credit where it’s due

A slight pity Yildirim didn’t get into the fight could have been interesting

How exactly could it have been interesting when one of the fights is so overmatched?

I don't dislike Eubank at all, i'd like to see him succeed but he does think he's a bigger star than he is, since Saunders he's wasted his career.

LionsV2 wrote:How exactly could it have been interesting when one of the fights is so overmatched?

I don't dislike Eubank at all, i'd like to see him succeed but he does think he's a bigger star than he is, since Saunders he's wasted his career.

Since Saunders he’s wasted his career..

That’s the most idiotic thing you’ve ever posted which by your standards is saying something

Warren doesn’t want to deal with the Eubanks because they’re too difficult yeah right

What has he done since Saunders exactly?

Entered a tournament that could make him a multi millionaire

He's not actually faced anyone of relevance then, strange that you condone money grabbing when it suits you.

Are you insane in the process he’s aiming to prove he’s one of the best super middleweights in the world as well as make a fortune winner of the tournament to fight Ramirez and DeGale?

It's a tournament that consists of one world champion and frankly a pretty poor level overall; outside of Eubank, Groves and Smith there is little talent involved.

Yeah but the winner establishes himself as a player DeGale won’t have any more excuses if Eubank wins it he beats Groves by the way

How about Ramirez vs DeGale next year with the winner of that to face the winner of the tournament?

Gotta say i think your being a bit harsh there Lions, think we all know Eubank could have sat on his laurels calling himself a 'world champ' and made himself a fair chunk of change, he's taking part in a tournament that whilst may not be 1 - 10 top in the world has some fairly talented fella's in it and if Eubank wins it then his standing surely has to be a lot higher than a lot of people have thought.

I can't stand the guy and hope whoever faces him next gives him a boxing lesson BUT it was a very good performance against a limited opponent and the stoppage when it came was fierce. It doesn't elevate him as such but i've got a touch more respect for him than i had before the fight

Rather than having wasted his career since BJS, I think he has been quite shrewdly handled. The BJS fight exposed his limitations, and came, in hindsight, a little too early for him. The level of opposition he has faced since has been about right- he's developed whist not being at risk, and has clearly improved- his jab, footwork and work rate are all noticeably better . At the same time he's won a couple of belts and got himself into a tournament that guarantees him a big domestic show down against Groves ( a fight in which a close loss wouldn't be career ending) and if he wins that, a final against another very credible opponent. And all without having to sell his soul to Warren.

Derbymanc wrote:Gotta say i think your being a bit harsh there Lions, think we all know Eubank could have sat on his laurels calling himself a 'world champ' and made himself a fair chunk of change, he's taking part in a tournament that whilst may not be 1 - 10 top in the world has some fairly talented fella's in it and if Eubank wins it then his standing surely has to be a lot higher than a lot of people have thought.

I can't stand the guy and hope whoever faces him next gives him a boxing lesson BUT it was a very good performance against a limited opponent and the stoppage when it came was fierce. It doesn't elevate him as such but i've got a touch more respect for him than i had before the fight

You have more faith in Groves vs Eubank taking place than I have my friend....

Michael Spinks was in the HBO unification series for Holmes 2 and Tanstad................But walked away from the tournament before Tyson....and chose Cooney instead..

I'll pay for Eubank v Groves..............But I'll believe it when I see it........Can't see him beating Groves.

I think he has to Truss and as much as i dislike the guy, gotta give him the benefit of the doubt until he pulls out. I hate to say it but he shown a lot more skill on saturday than i thought he posessed and whilst i'd put Groves favourite, i'm still not sure he's back to his best after Froch but should be a good battle.

It's boxing though so god knows, i wouldn't be overly surprised if it hadn't but am thinking it's legit (always look on the bright side and all that bollox :-)

That's if Groves beats Cox...

Groves has looked damaged goods since Froch and took some hammer from Chudinov before heroically pulling out the win.

hazharrison wrote:That's if Groves beats Cox...

Groves has looked damaged goods since Froch and took some hammer from Chudinov before heroically pulling out the win.

My memory of that fight is Groves winning comfortably to be honest.

LionsV2 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:That's if Groves beats Cox...

Groves has looked damaged goods since Froch and took some hammer from Chudinov before heroically pulling out the win.

My memory of that fight is Groves winning comfortably to be honest.

I would say Groves is coming off a career best win against Chudinov. Took some blows but beat down a durable opponent and looked quite good doing so. Not saying Chudinov is a world beater but that’s the best name on his (winning) resume for me.

LionsV2 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:That's if Groves beats Cox...

Groves has looked damaged goods since Froch and took some hammer from Chudinov before heroically pulling out the win.

My memory of that fight is Groves winning comfortably to be honest.

Aside from the broken jaw.

It was an excellent win for Groves, yet he lost the first three rounds and looked uncomfortable throughout (Chudinov landed plenty early).

melv500 wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:That's if Groves beats Cox...

Groves has looked damaged goods since Froch and took some hammer from Chudinov before heroically pulling out the win.

My memory of that fight is Groves winning comfortably to be honest.

I would say Groves is coming off a career best win against Chudinov. Took some blows but beat down a durable opponent and looked quite good doing so. Not saying Chudinov is a world beater but that’s the best name on his (winning) resume for me.

Better than degale melv?

I think people tend to overlook the degale fight as they were ‘young contenders’ but a wins a win.

I didn't think of Degale in fairness Milky so yes DeGale is the best name he beat. However I would still say after the Froch losses and the subsequent performances including the Jack loss that Chudinov was his best win. He took a few shots but took them pretty well and knocked out a tough opponent. Also he finally got his world title. I just remember after watching the fight I thought Groves did really well. So for me I'd say that was the better win even if DeGale is the better name.

Not a huge size disparity:

https://youtu.be/KqFOcLMU5iw

Cox looks tiny.

And Sauerlands tan

Kalle’s having a good chew on that gum not sure I like to see the promoter chewing gum on stage though not sure it looks very professional

As for the fight well Cox is something of an unknown quantity at this level that’s why it’s difficult to make a prediction. George a very warm favourite I guess stylistically they’re thinking this fight favours Groves. Groves on points but a massive upset wouldn’t upset me at all I hope he’s not underestimating Cox’ ring iq

Anyone know what channel it's on? Can't find it anywhere...

melv500 wrote:Anyone know what channel it's on? Can't find it anywhere...

ITV Box Office

Groves should win this, Cox is good but Groves should have too much.

Groves beats Eubank before losing to Smith in the Final

When you hear that vile dirge of an anthem being played it's enough to make you want both fighters to lose

But go on...I'll go with Cox. The lesser of two evils

Are 5live not doing radio? That's shocking if they arn't

Cracking opener

Yup good first round

And this is why we love Boxing. Unpredictability

Groves landing cleaner shots

Like that one

Great finish. Groves should beat Eubank, he'll box off the back foot all night and pick him off.

Body shot and it's all over, Cox had to go for it but the difference in class was telling; Groves landed the better shots throughout.