Re: Saw DeGale v. Groves AND....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dia bando
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
DeGale was ROBBED. What a gyp. You don't have to like DeGale, but respect his effort and score honestly.
DeGale won that fight by at least 3 rounds.
Brits sure do know how to shoot themselves in the foot. Where can Groves go now? No where.
I was thinking DeGale won by 4 rounds, Groves was lucky but DeGale was cruising the last few rounds if he had pressed Groves, he could have ko him.
I'm not a fan of Degale, but I had him winning it by one round. I don't think that's a robbery. The key was that after that fight, Groves kept improving, whereas Degale did jack shit for 2 years. If they fight again, I reckon Groves will win again because I think Degale has a bit of a mental block with Groves. He said himself that Groves would be a harder fight for him than Froch. They know each other too well.
Where did Groves "improve"?? Because he had one lucky shot vs. Froch?? C'mon...
It's funny how people go to extremes. So Groves had "one Lucky Shot" vs Froch! Are you dreaming? Go back to the 6th round of 1st fight and tell me how many "lucky shots" He lost both fights, nobody is saying any different, but he gave Froch 2 tough fights and showed he deserved the shot.
If Groves , didn't "improve," yet gave Froch 2decent fights, then we must be overrating Froch, no? Because if Froch was what we're led to believe, then he should've dealt with a fighter that you believe Groves is like quite easily.
Now, let's get to Degale. An Olympic Champion with all the fanfares he had, After losing to Groves,He basically sulked for 2 years beating stiffs and looking bored in every post fight interview, clearly disapproving of his promoter. Blaming this all on "being injured for 2 years", all of a sudden the injury clears up and he fights his best fight to date against Gonzales, the guy is a sulking fraud!
Groves beat Paul Smith better than Degale did, and he beat Glen Johnson better than Froch did. In this time , what the fuck did Degale do?
I think the second fight Groves had with Froch as worse than the first one. In fact, Froch toyed with him until he sparked him out of there.
DeGale had him hurt on a few occasions in their fight.
And, British fans decided they were not going to like DeGale, for whatever reason. So, they would rather destroy a prospect for a major world title, just so they can enact revenge because they don't like him personally?
I see the same politics play out in English football, and Brazilian football. Politics is ruining the game.
Re: Saw DeGale v. Groves AND....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dia bando
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
DeGale was ROBBED. What a gyp. You don't have to like DeGale, but respect his effort and score honestly.
DeGale won that fight by at least 3 rounds.
Brits sure do know how to shoot themselves in the foot. Where can Groves go now? No where.
I was thinking DeGale won by 4 rounds, Groves was lucky but DeGale was cruising the last few rounds if he had pressed Groves, he could have ko him.
I'm not a fan of Degale, but I had him winning it by one round. I don't think that's a robbery. The key was that after that fight, Groves kept improving, whereas Degale did jack shit for 2 years. If they fight again, I reckon Groves will win again because I think Degale has a bit of a mental block with Groves. He said himself that Groves would be a harder fight for him than Froch. They know each other too well.
Where did Groves "improve"?? Because he had one lucky shot vs. Froch?? C'mon...
It's funny how people go to extremes. So Groves had "one Lucky Shot" vs Froch! Are you dreaming? Go back to the 6th round of 1st fight and tell me how many "lucky shots" He lost both fights, nobody is saying any different, but he gave Froch 2 tough fights and showed he deserved the shot.
If Groves , didn't "improve," yet gave Froch 2decent fights, then we must be overrating Froch, no? Because if Froch was what we're led to believe, then he should've dealt with a fighter that you believe Groves is like quite easily.
Now, let's get to Degale. An Olympic Champion with all the fanfares he had, After losing to Groves,He basically sulked for 2 years beating stiffs and looking bored in every post fight interview, clearly disapproving of his promoter. Blaming this all on "being injured for 2 years", all of a sudden the injury clears up and he fights his best fight to date against Gonzales, the guy is a sulking fraud!
Groves beat Paul Smith better than Degale did, and he beat Glen Johnson better than Froch did. In this time , what the fuck did Degale do?
I think the second fight Groves had with Froch as worse than the first one. In fact, Froch toyed with him until he sparked him out of there.
DeGale had him hurt on a few occasions in their fight.
And, British fans decided they were not going to like DeGale, for whatever reason. So, they would rather destroy a prospect for a major world title, just so they can enact revenge because they don't like him personally?
I see the same politics play out in English football, and Brazilian football. Politics is ruining the game.
"Froch toyed with him" are you Jim Watt in disguise? I suppose in the 1st fight getting constantly buzzed and going back to his corner talking shit was all part of his "cunning plan?"
So Degale " hurt Groves on a few occasions" forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what Boxers are supposed to do? Is that all you can say in Degale's defence? I've already said Froch beat Groves twice pretty fair and square after all said and done, but this thread is about Groves and Degale , and to say Degale has been disappointing since wining the Olympics is as massive an understatement as saying Hitler was "not a very nice chap!"
Re: Saw DeGale v. Groves AND....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dia bando
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
DeGale was ROBBED. What a gyp. You don't have to like DeGale, but respect his effort and score honestly.
DeGale won that fight by at least 3 rounds.
Brits sure do know how to shoot themselves in the foot. Where can Groves go now? No where.
I was thinking DeGale won by 4 rounds, Groves was lucky but DeGale was cruising the last few rounds if he had pressed Groves, he could have ko him.
I'm not a fan of Degale, but I had him winning it by one round. I don't think that's a robbery. The key was that after that fight, Groves kept improving, whereas Degale did jack shit for 2 years. If they fight again, I reckon Groves will win again because I think Degale has a bit of a mental block with Groves. He said himself that Groves would be a harder fight for him than Froch. They know each other too well.
Where did Groves "improve"?? Because he had one lucky shot vs. Froch?? C'mon...
It's funny how people go to extremes. So Groves had "one Lucky Shot" vs Froch! Are you dreaming? Go back to the 6th round of 1st fight and tell me how many "lucky shots" He lost both fights, nobody is saying any different, but he gave Froch 2 tough fights and showed he deserved the shot.
If Groves , didn't "improve," yet gave Froch 2decent fights, then we must be overrating Froch, no? Because if Froch was what we're led to believe, then he should've dealt with a fighter that you believe Groves is like quite easily.
Now, let's get to Degale. An Olympic Champion with all the fanfares he had, After losing to Groves,He basically sulked for 2 years beating stiffs and looking bored in every post fight interview, clearly disapproving of his promoter. Blaming this all on "being injured for 2 years", all of a sudden the injury clears up and he fights his best fight to date against Gonzales, the guy is a sulking fraud!
Groves beat Paul Smith better than Degale did, and he beat Glen Johnson better than Froch did. In this time , what the fuck did Degale do?
I think the second fight Groves had with Froch as worse than the first one. In fact, Froch toyed with him until he sparked him out of there.
DeGale had him hurt on a few occasions in their fight.
And, British fans decided they were not going to like DeGale, for whatever reason. So, they would rather destroy a prospect for a major world title, just so they can enact revenge because they don't like him personally?
I see the same politics play out in English football, and Brazilian football. Politics is ruining the game.
"Froch toyed with him" are you Jim Watt in disguise? I suppose in the 1st fight getting constantly buzzed and going back to his corner talking shit was all part of his "cunning plan?"
So Degale " hurt Groves on a few occasions" forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what Boxers are supposed to do? Is that all you can say in Degale's defence? I've already said Froch beat Groves twice pretty fair and square after all said and done, but this thread is about Groves and Degale , and to say Degale has been disappointing since wining the Olympics is as massive an understatement as saying Hitler was "not a very nice chap!"
Groves had a good night the first fight, but was obviously controlled the second one. Not saying he isn't good, but he aint that good. And he also had a good night vs. DeGale- a lucky night.
Beating an older Glen Johnson is not a very good thing to have as your only calling card over DeGale.
DeGale won their first meeting. Quit promoting mediocrity.
Re: Saw DeGale v. Groves AND....
.... and folks saying DeGale was disappointing after the Olympics is no call for him to rush ahead on anything, and it isn't an excuse to rip him off vs. Groves.
That's just it- the boxing scene ripped DeGale off vs. Groves because they feel he should be a lot further ahead. What a load of horse manure.
Re: Saw DeGale v. Groves AND....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja
.... and folks saying DeGale was disappointing after the Olympics is no call for him to rush ahead on anything, and it isn't an excuse to rip him off vs. Groves.
That's just it- the boxing scene ripped DeGale off vs. Groves because they feel he should be a lot further ahead. What a load of horse manure.
Like I said before, I thought Degale won by a round, so I'm not promoting mediocrity in Groves, although you probably are in Degale. If they fought each other now, Groves would beat him, simple as that. It doesn't mean Groves is a World beater, just a bit better than Degale.
