-
Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
i disagree, respectively..
While i agree that he did not impress me completely against JT, he definitely has world class power and determination..
I think the main thing is his hype from the Brit's.. It gets to you, and we all saw that Froch is a very beatable opponent.. He has a good chin, but he's very open to power shots all night..
I don't think you can say that Taylor isn't a top class opponent, either. Taylor has power, a laser jab, and his defense has looked VERY good as of recent. His ONLY issue is his stamina in late rounds. Froch defeated a great fighter, in my eyes. As much as i HATE to say this, I think calzaghe takes him out with ease. Froch will get beat up bad if that fight takes place. I feel the same result would take place if he fought Kessler, considering Kessler keeps a safe distance from his opponent throughout the fight and does not take many risks to get hit. I can see Kessler winning a UD or late KO victory against Froch.
With that said Froch could take out any second tier super middle with ease. He's too big and strong, but his defense needs a whole lot of work.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
i kinda agree dat he aint all that but he has tremendous heart
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe.
LOL I like the way you worded that, Sir. Good writing skills. Scrambling home... ;D
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when NOBODY has ever destroyed ANY those fighters INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he REALLY DESTROYED him
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he
DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when
NOBODY has ever destroyed
ANY those fighters
INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik
DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he
REALLY DESTROYED him
How is it fair to say that it's unfair to suggest that Froch needs to Destroy those fighters because no one has Destoryed them, and then say that he Really Destroyed a fighter that has already had the same thing happen to him against another fighter? Give me a break.
I think that what was learned about Froch in the first 2/3 of that fight were much more valuable than the 12th round.. we knew he had the power to do what he did.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I Like Froch But He Wouldnt Have A Chance Aginst Joe. I Would Love To See Him And Kessler Fight It Would Be A Good Fight For Both Of Them . I Think Kessler Would Win I Think He Could Unite All The Belts.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I'm not sure anyone thinks that Carl Froch looked technically amazing the other night, no matter who's side you're on. But in my opinion what he lacks in technique he certainly makes up for in determination and heart, and that can take you a long way.
But I agree, with his left arm down like that it irritates the crap out of me and I hope he starts to adjust that before his next fight. Not that it stopped him from losing the other night, or his other 24, but easily could have.
Wait til' after his next fight to see how he really performs on the world stage. He could get battered from rope to rope or he could just cause another upset.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RP33
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he
DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when
NOBODY has ever destroyed
ANY those fighters
INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik
DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he
REALLY DESTROYED him
How is it fair to say that it's unfair to suggest that Froch needs to
Destroy those fighters because no one has
Destoryed them, and then say that he
Really Destroyed a fighter that has already had the same thing happen to him against another fighter? Give me a break.
I think that what was learned about Froch in the first 2/3 of that fight were much more valuable than the 12th round.. we knew he had the power to do what he did.
I don't even understand that sentence RP?
So are you saying that Froch DOES need to completely destroy Kessler, Hopkins or Pavlik in order to merit a fight with Joe?
Are you saying that he DIDN'T destroy Jermain Taylor?
And I never claimed that nobody had destroyed Jermain Taylor before, I was referring to Pavlik, Hopkins, Wright and Kessler. If you disagree then when were they destroyed?
What is your point exactly?
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I think if your capable of goin 12 rounds with Taylor win any rounds at all, get up from 1 of his better shots and knock him out you are desereved to be amongst the divisions top men.
But heart and chin aside if what we saw at that he has to offer at this level i see him as the weakest of the bunch and if anybody fancys clearin up the division is surely aint guna be him.
I think the level of ability Taylor has was a suprise to him its a big step from what hes fought to the big time and he only just stretched to it.
Hes got a decent jab and could use it more and work behind it, he also has 2 hands he could put near his face now and again while under attack instead of tryin to duck and slip everything. Basics really.
But at 31 and havin fought his way and winning so many fights im not sure he can raise his game any more than that, especially seein as he couldnt do it against Taylor when his trainer was beggin him to and he really needed to. I feel if hes guna accomplish more things like that hes guna have to do it with the chin and heart.
However i do think Taylor is the fastest of the top boys and Froch suited him maybe he will cope better against the others.
I know im goin on a bit.
Calzaghe!!!!! I dont wana here it Carl. I dont think hed stand a chance unless Joe has faded big time since retirement and Kessler is the main man in this division as far as im concerned and hed deal with anybody, especially Froch.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I think it was a very disappointed performance from Froch in all honesty, he should have wiped the floor with Taylor....
Since his defeats to Pavlik Taylor certainly hasn't had the same thirst for the sport. He also has had a very limited career at super middleweight beating a shell of a man in Jeff Lacy.
Froch should have been too big, too strong and too hungry to let Taylor dominant in the way he did. As long as Froch carries his hands so low he will never beat quality operators at 168lbs, Kessler would absolutely destroy him, as would Bute. His defence is probably the worst I've seen a world champion have in quite a while- he constantly leaves himself open to right hands, Taylor had him hurt at least 3 times throughout the fight and a man more naturally disposed to the super middle weight division would have finished him around the 7th round.
If Froch is to realise his dream of being a trully great champion he needs to keep his hands up- especially the left, and tuck his chin in, he also needs to stop trying to make a name for himself off Calzaghe's back, its pathetic.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Not so good technically I agree but he has many other tools
Heart
Good power
Good stamina
Good chin
Determination
These have all worked pretty well for him so far. I bet there are a LOT of better skilled fighters that cannot match Froch on many of those strengths, does that make Froch the better fighter? Or is the guy with better skills the better fighter?
I had him way behind on the cards, does not matter though, Froch had better stamina than Taylor and Taylor could not continue to fight his fight and Froch knocked him out. End of.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ukansodoff
I think if your capable of goin 12 rounds with Taylor win any rounds at all, get up from 1 of his better shots and knock him out you are desereved to be amongst the divisions top men.
But heart and chin aside if what we saw at that he has to offer at this level i see him as the weakest of the bunch and if anybody fancys clearin up the division is surely aint guna be him.
I think the level of ability Taylor has was a suprise to him its a big step from what hes fought to the big time and he only just stretched to it.
Hes got a decent jab and could use it more and work behind it, he also has 2 hands he could put near his face now and again while under attack instead of tryin to duck and slip everything. Basics really.
But at 31 and havin fought his way and winning so many fights im not sure he can raise his game any more than that, especially seein as he couldnt do it against Taylor when his trainer was beggin him to and he really needed to. I feel if hes guna accomplish more things like that hes guna have to do it with the chin and heart.
However i do think Taylor is the fastest of the top boys and Froch suited him maybe he will cope better against the others.
I know im goin on a bit.
Calzaghe!!!!! I dont wana here it Carl. I dont think hed stand a chance unless Joe has faded big time since retirement and Kessler is the main man in this division as far as im concerned and hed deal with anybody, especially Froch.
Well out of interest what does Andrade offer aside from heart, power and chin?
And none of the top fighters in the 168 lb division have beaten a top quality boxer like Jermain Taylor, in fact Kessler is the only fighter there who has fought someone as good as Taylor in Joe Calzaghe and he lost.
Bute, Andrade, Green, Mundine, Miranda, none of them have beaten an opponent of the calibre of Jermain Taylor or even fought one.
Taylor is faster and slicker than all of that lot and obviously his speed and technique and boxing ability gave Carl problems early becuase it was a massive step up in class for him.
But there is nobody else at 168 who has the pure boxing ability and speed of Jermain Taylor so I can't see Froch getting outboxed like that again.
In my opinion he walks through Lucian Bute, he completely outboxes Andrade, and takes Miranda apart inside the distance.
The two already at the top that will give him the most problems are Kessler (clearly the divisions best and Mundine because of his awkward style)
We don't yet know how good Ward and Dirrell may be so I'm not mentioning them yet.
But I don't get why just because Froch was outboxed for 5 rounds by the best boxer in the weight class before coming back to ko him, you guys think he'll be outboxed by everybody else.
If Taylor's boxing ability wasn't too much for Froch to handle then none of the others will be either.
In my mind he's clearly number 2 behind Mikkell Kessler, and he has the best name on his resume.
Bute almost got ktfo by Andrade and trust me, if Andrade and Froch ever get in the ring, you'll see Andrade isn't on Froch's level.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I've said this in another post and don't mean to repeat myself but i think Froch could polish up nicely to something special but he needs a new trainer who can help with his defence. Maybe its too late for that now, old dogs new tricks and all that, but if he doesn't give it a try i say he'll end up gettin knocked out clean sooner rather than later now he has stepped up the level of opposition.
I think the last time i saw somethin so flamboyant in style as to not have any defence was Naseem Hamed and we all know what happened there. Love watchin Froch and think he has serious power but i think he struggles against Kessler who is the man at 168.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Kel- I would agree with you, but I think the technical errors that Froch makes ar ehuge ones- and fairly simple ones to correct, by holding his hands so low he's inviting himself to be punched all night- bigger hitters at 168 will take the oppertunity and finish him- full credit to the manner in which he won- can't knock him at all- but I just don't see him doing it against a Kessler or Bute.
It's so frustrating watching him making sloppy mistakes- confidence is a great thing but his so arrogant in leaving his left hand so low- and unwilling to listen to his trainer who kept telling him to pick it up- he nearly lost the fight.
His attitude and physical attributes are fantastic but he needs to improve technically to be atrully world class fighter. His constant talk of calzaghe winds me up no end. He should do his talking in the ring- not try to make a name from himself by slating a trully great champion
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
yeah it is frustrating especially whenyou seem after getting dropped that he still has his hands low. when i first saw froch i looked at his stance and thought he was a counter puncher and would roll his shoulder a lot
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Carls got something money cant buy, I had my doubts. It will be interesting what happened Saturday will Help His developement and Confidence. Im looking forward to how He developes ;D
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR MEDIOCRE !!
LOL. I don't know about Cory Spinks. Even I wouldn't go that far. But I agree with damn near everything you wrote. Overall an A+ post. :thumb:
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he
DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when
NOBODY has ever destroyed
ANY those fighters
INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik
DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he
REALLY DESTROYED him
Taylor was beaten by a few good punches and his own lack of stamina and heart. Hopkins destroyed Pavlik 100x worse and Williams beat Wright 10x worse. Froch is more Micky Ward than Joe Calzaghe and I mean that as a compliment.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he
DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when
NOBODY has ever destroyed
ANY those fighters
INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik
DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he
REALLY DESTROYED him
Taylor was beaten by a few good punches and his own lack of stamina and heart. Hopkins destroyed Pavlik 100x worse and Williams beat Wright 10x worse. Froch is more Micky Ward than Joe Calzaghe and I mean that as a compliment.
Don't know about Micky Ward. I say more Hector Quiroz
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Someone please feed Froch to Kessler :)
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JudahShuffle
Someone please feed Froch to Kessler :)
What's the point? Kessler would only turn him down and demand Stjepan Bozic
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
There is no question that Froch’s fights provide entertainment but when he has stepped up to world class level he has sucked and now he wants Calzaghe. If Froch was destroying guys then he could legitimately talk about Calzaghe. If he wants Calzaghe to take him seriously then fight Kessler and DESTROY HIM or fight Pavlik and DESTROY HIM or fight Winky Wright and DESTROY HIM or fight Hopkins and DESTROY HIM. He needs to do something to a top fighter that no-one has done before.
He seems to think scrambling home against a former ex-champ (J.Taylor) when he was behind on points after being outboxed for 11 round is good enough form to beat Calzaghe. I think team Froch have to be VERY careful if they want to hold to his title. I would fancy Cory Spinks to beat him, that’s not a diss on Spinks, my point is it would not take an outstanding fighter to beat him, it would not even take a very good one, just decent world level performer would beat him in my opinion
Carl Froch – YOUR NOT THAT GOOD !!
Why do you demand that he
DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when
NOBODY has ever destroyed
ANY those fighters
INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik
DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he
REALLY DESTROYED him
Taylor was beaten by a few good punches and his own lack of stamina and heart. Hopkins destroyed Pavlik 100x worse and Williams beat Wright 10x worse. Froch is more Micky Ward than Joe Calzaghe and I mean that as a compliment.
How did Hopkins destroy Pavlik much worse than Froch destroyed Taylor? :confused:
Froch KNOCKED Taylor out! That is more emphatic than any points victory. The judges are only need in the event that the fight isn't decided within the time limit, therefore Froch's win is better by definition.
The ultimate goal of boxing is to knock out your opponent, the scoring is only for humane reasons to prevent boxers fighting to the death.
Have a look at Pavlik at the end of the Hopkins fight and look at Taylor at the end of the Froch fight and ask yourself again who got destroyed :)
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
----
Originally Posted By Bilbo
How did Hopkins destroy Pavlik much worse than Froch destroyed Taylor?
Froch KNOCKED Taylor out! That is more emphatic than any points victory. The judges are only need in the event that the fight isn't decided within the time limit, therefore Froch's win is better by definition. The ultimate goal of boxing is to knock out your opponent, the scoring is only for humane reasons to prevent boxers fighting to the death. Have a look at Pavlik at the end of the Hopkins fight and look at Taylor at the end of the Froch fight and ask yourself again who got destroyed
----
Not at all. If you think Froch victory over Taylor was more emphatic than Hopkins over Pavlik then you don't know boxing, my friend. If they fought again Taylor would still most likely be made favourite to beat Froch. Taylor just ran out of gas, Froch didn't outbox Taylor, out speed him, show brilliant combos or make Taylor looks foolish and amateurish...but that's what Hopkins did to Pavlik.
All Froch brings to the table is a good chin, determination and a lot of heart, not only would Cory Spinks beat him, but I think if Mayorga bulked up he would beat him, I think if Tito Trindad came back he would beat him. I thought it was a terrible performance and he got lucky.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
denilson200
----
Originally Posted By Bilbo
How did Hopkins destroy Pavlik much worse than Froch destroyed Taylor?
Froch KNOCKED Taylor out! That is more emphatic than any points victory. The judges are only need in the event that the fight isn't decided within the time limit, therefore Froch's win is better by definition. The ultimate goal of boxing is to knock out your opponent, the scoring is only for humane reasons to prevent boxers fighting to the death. Have a look at Pavlik at the end of the Hopkins fight and look at Taylor at the end of the Froch fight and ask yourself again who got destroyed
----
Not at all. If you think Froch victory over Taylor was more emphatic than Hopkins over Pavlik then you don't know boxing, my friend. If they fought again Taylor would still most likely be made favourite to beat Froch. Taylor just ran out of gas, Froch didn't outbox Taylor, out speed him, show brilliant combos or make Taylor looks foolish and amateurish...but that's what Hopkins did to Pavlik.
All Froch brings to the table is a good chin, determination and a lot of heart, not only would Cory Spinks beat him, but I think if Mayorga bulked up he would beat him, I think if Tito Trindad came back he would beat him. I thought it was a terrible performance and he got lucky.
And I'm the one who knows nothing about boxing :rolleyes:
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Why do you demand that he DESTROY the likes of Kessler, Hopkins, Pavlik and Winky when NOBODY has ever destroyed ANY those fighters INCLUDING JOE CALZAGHE
And if you consider Williams win over Winky and B Hops win over Pavlik DESTRUCTIONS then please go back and watch the 12th round of Froch vs Taylor because he REALLY DESTROYED him
Taylor was beaten by a few good punches and his own lack of stamina and heart. Hopkins destroyed Pavlik 100x worse and Williams beat Wright 10x worse. Froch is more Micky Ward than Joe Calzaghe and I mean that as a compliment.
Don't know about Micky Ward. I say more Hector Quiroz
I don't mean to imply that he's as tough as Ward or that he fights in the style. Ward was a a guy who could be losing almost every round, then bang, land his punch and either turn the fight around or win it with a KO.
But now that I think about it, Ward destroyed guys even in losses or close wins. Several fights were never the same after enduring Wards body shots. Froch isn't that punishing.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
I don't think Froch looks all that impressive but he did what a lot of fighters couldn't do and that is stop Jermaine Taylor. Wright couldn't do it, Hopkins laboured over a lot rounds and couldn't do it and here is this talentless Froch knocking him out! :o
Not bad at all really. ;D
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Taylor was beaten by a few good punches and his own lack of stamina and heart. Hopkins destroyed Pavlik 100x worse and Williams beat Wright 10x worse. Froch is more Micky Ward than Joe Calzaghe and I mean that as a compliment.
Don't know about Micky Ward. I say more Hector Quiroz
I don't mean to imply that he's as tough as Ward or that he fights in the style. Ward was a a guy who could be losing almost every round, then bang, land his punch and either turn the fight around or win it with a KO.
But now that I think about it, Ward destroyed guys even in losses or close wins. Several fights were never the same after enduring Wards body shots. Froch isn't that punishing.
So now Froch isn't even as good as Mickey Ward?
How many world titles did Ward win again? How many former undisputed world champs and p4p stars did he beat?
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Don't know about Micky Ward. I say more Hector Quiroz
I don't mean to imply that he's as tough as Ward or that he fights in the style. Ward was a a guy who could be losing almost every round, then bang, land his punch and either turn the fight around or win it with a KO.
But now that I think about it, Ward destroyed guys even in losses or close wins. Several fights were never the same after enduring Wards body shots. Froch isn't that punishing.
So now Froch isn't even as good as Mickey Ward?
How many world titles did Ward win again? How many former undisputed world champs and p4p stars did he beat?
Taylor is a former pound for pound guy at a lower weight. Since then he's gone downhill to the extent that even Froch could beat him. If Froch was facing a genuine pound for pound 168 pounder or even a pound for pound middleweight he'd get his arse handed to him.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Don't know about Micky Ward. I say more Hector Quiroz
I don't mean to imply that he's as tough as Ward or that he fights in the style. Ward was a a guy who could be losing almost every round, then bang, land his punch and either turn the fight around or win it with a KO.
But now that I think about it, Ward destroyed guys even in losses or close wins. Several fights were never the same after enduring Wards body shots. Froch isn't that punishing.
So now Froch isn't even as good as Mickey Ward?
How many world titles did Ward win again? How many former undisputed world champs and p4p stars did he beat?
Dude, you are so touchy. I didn't say Froch wasn't as good as Ward, I said he's not as punishing. And he's not. And as far has saying that Froch is closer to Ward than Calzaghe, let me break it down simply. Lets say the Joe Calzaghe gets an A+ grade as a fighter. Micky Ward gets a B grade as a fighter. Froch is a B+, not an A-. Kessler is an A-. There's a bigger gap between guys like Roy Jones, Calzaghe, James Toney, and Floyd Mayweather and Froch than there is between Froch and Ward.
Ward was one of the TOUGHEST fighters ever. Also, he had a style and a skillset that inflicted career changing punishment. Taylor might have gotten KO'd, but I doubt he was pissing blood for days like Gatti and Green did.
But both fighters use toughness, determination, and power to beat more athletically gifted opponents.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
I don't mean to imply that he's as tough as Ward or that he fights in the style. Ward was a a guy who could be losing almost every round, then bang, land his punch and either turn the fight around or win it with a KO.
But now that I think about it, Ward destroyed guys even in losses or close wins. Several fights were never the same after enduring Wards body shots. Froch isn't that punishing.
So now Froch isn't even as good as Mickey Ward?
How many world titles did Ward win again? How many former undisputed world champs and p4p stars did he beat?
Dude, you are so touchy. I didn't say Froch wasn't as good as Ward, I said he's not as punishing. And he's not. And as far has saying that Froch is closer to Ward than Calzaghe, let me break it down simply. Lets say the Joe Calzaghe gets an A+ grade as a fighter. Micky Ward gets a B grade as a fighter. Froch is a B+, not an A-. Kessler is an A-. There's a bigger gap between guys like Roy Jones, Calzaghe, James Toney, and Floyd Mayweather and Froch than there is between Froch and Ward.
Ward was one of the TOUGHEST fighters ever. Also, he had a style and a skillset that inflicted career changing punishment. Taylor might have gotten KO'd, but I doubt he was pissing blood for days like Gatti and Green did.
But both fighters use toughness, determination, and power to beat more athletically gifted opponents.
I'm not touchy at all mate, I enjoy these debates sorry if it comes as touchy but I never feel that way.
Anyway back on topic I can see your point although maybe I underestimate Micky Ward slightly. For me he was a tough but limited guy, on the same level as John Duddy maybe. To me he wasn't that damaging seeing as Gatti beat him 2-1 and went the distance every time whereas when he stepped up to the likes of Oscar, Floyd and even Angel Manfredy and Baldomir he got killed. If he'd have been forced to go 10 rounds with any of those guys he'd have been permenantly damaged.
I don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness. If Froch was the same size as Gatti he'd have ruined him a lot more than Ward did imo. Actually maybe that's not true as Gatti would have been stopped inside 5 or 6 rounds so maybe total damage accumalation would have been less.
But I do thing the difference in class between Ward and Froch is greater than between Froch and Calzaghe.
I'd give Froch a chance at least against Calzaghe, I'd not give Ward any chance whatosever against Ward pound for pound.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Froch is not a great but with fights like Pascal & Taylor he is definitely great for the sport!
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
You'd have to go back 4 or 5 years to find Calzaghe's last stoppage - and that the second time against Mario Veit.
Froch can bang from the first to the last bell and Joe is hittable and his chin is not as good as people think.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
So now Froch isn't even as good as Mickey Ward?
How many world titles did Ward win again? How many former undisputed world champs and p4p stars did he beat?
Dude, you are so touchy. I didn't say Froch wasn't as good as Ward, I said he's not as punishing. And he's not. And as far has saying that Froch is closer to Ward than Calzaghe, let me break it down simply. Lets say the Joe Calzaghe gets an A+ grade as a fighter. Micky Ward gets a B grade as a fighter. Froch is a B+, not an A-. Kessler is an A-. There's a bigger gap between guys like Roy Jones, Calzaghe, James Toney, and Floyd Mayweather and Froch than there is between Froch and Ward.
Ward was one of the TOUGHEST fighters ever. Also, he had a style and a skillset that inflicted career changing punishment. Taylor might have gotten KO'd, but I doubt he was pissing blood for days like Gatti and Green did.
But both fighters use toughness, determination, and power to beat more athletically gifted opponents.
I'm not touchy at all mate, I enjoy these debates sorry if it comes as touchy but I never feel that way.
Anyway back on topic I can see your point although maybe I underestimate Micky Ward slightly. For me he was a tough but limited guy, on the same level as John Duddy maybe. To me he wasn't that damaging seeing as Gatti beat him 2-1 and went the distance every time whereas when he stepped up to the likes of Oscar, Floyd and even Angel Manfredy and Baldomir he got killed. If he'd have been forced to go 10 rounds with any of those guys he'd have been permenantly damaged.
I don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness. If Froch was the same size as Gatti he'd have ruined him a lot more than Ward did imo. Actually maybe that's not true as Gatti would have been stopped inside 5 or 6 rounds so maybe total damage accumalation would have been less.
But I do thing the difference in class between Ward and Froch is greater than between Froch and Calzaghe.
I'd give Froch a chance at least against Calzaghe, I'd not give Ward any chance whatosever against Ward pound for pound.
No offense, Baggins, but you are out of your mind on this one. Froch would have ZERO chance against Calzaghe. He would have ZERO chance against a true P4P talent like Prime Jones or Toney. Eubank, Benn, or Steve Collins would have destroyed him. It's not even close.
You don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness? Allow me to remind you of a few things about Gatti. The Manfredy stoppage was on a cut. Oscar was a P4P fighter in his prime and Gatti moved up in weight class to face him. He fought only 3 times at 140 before jumping up to face Oscar at 147. As for all the other stoppages 1. They call came after the 3 Ward fights. 2. Mayweather can punch at 140, Floyd was in him prime, and 140 is arguably his best weight. Oh, and he's the best fighter of our generation. 3. The Gomez and Baldy fights were at WW. Gatti never beat anybody decent at 147 and we all know he was shot at that point.
Many referees would have stopped Gatti/Ward 1 in round 9. He was out on his feet and taking shots. Go youtube it.
Froch has beaten TWO above average fighters. Yes, he beat a FORMER p4p fighter (from a lower weight class) after losing the first 8 rounds and getting knocked on his ass. In Calzaghe's whole career, he was never made to look as crappy as Taylor made Froch look for most of the fight. I don't ever remember Calzaghe needing a KO to win.
Here's a list of guys that Ward beat that are equal or near equal p4p to Froch's second best win, Pascal:
Gatti, Green, Augustus, Sanchez and Neary.
You'll see by the time Froch's career is over. Last week was probably his high water mark.
Let's say Miranda beats Ward and Dirrell becomes Froch's mandatory. He could very well lose that fight. Seriously. If Ward beats Miranda, I wouldn't be shocked if Ward beats Froch.
Pound for pound, I'd certainly give the edge to Froch, but if I had to compare Froch to somebody p4p from Ward's era and weight class, I'd probably say he's around the level of a prime Sharma Mitchell. A solid top 5-10 fighter in his weight class.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Dude, you are so touchy. I didn't say Froch wasn't as good as Ward, I said he's not as punishing. And he's not. And as far has saying that Froch is closer to Ward than Calzaghe, let me break it down simply. Lets say the Joe Calzaghe gets an A+ grade as a fighter. Micky Ward gets a B grade as a fighter. Froch is a B+, not an A-. Kessler is an A-. There's a bigger gap between guys like Roy Jones, Calzaghe, James Toney, and Floyd Mayweather and Froch than there is between Froch and Ward.
Ward was one of the TOUGHEST fighters ever. Also, he had a style and a skillset that inflicted career changing punishment. Taylor might have gotten KO'd, but I doubt he was pissing blood for days like Gatti and Green did.
But both fighters use toughness, determination, and power to beat more athletically gifted opponents.
I'm not touchy at all mate, I enjoy these debates sorry if it comes as touchy but I never feel that way.
Anyway back on topic I can see your point although maybe I underestimate Micky Ward slightly. For me he was a tough but limited guy, on the same level as John Duddy maybe. To me he wasn't that damaging seeing as Gatti beat him 2-1 and went the distance every time whereas when he stepped up to the likes of Oscar, Floyd and even Angel Manfredy and Baldomir he got killed. If he'd have been forced to go 10 rounds with any of those guys he'd have been permenantly damaged.
I don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness. If Froch was the same size as Gatti he'd have ruined him a lot more than Ward did imo. Actually maybe that's not true as Gatti would have been stopped inside 5 or 6 rounds so maybe total damage accumalation would have been less.
But I do thing the difference in class between Ward and Froch is greater than between Froch and Calzaghe.
I'd give Froch a chance at least against Calzaghe, I'd not give Ward any chance whatosever against Ward pound for pound.
No offense, Baggins, but you are out of your mind on this one. Froch would have ZERO chance against Calzaghe. He would have ZERO chance against a true P4P talent like Prime Jones or Toney. Eubank, Benn, or Steve Collins would have destroyed him. It's not even close.
You don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness? Allow me to remind you of a few things about Gatti. The Manfredy stoppage was on a cut. Oscar was a P4P fighter in his prime and Gatti moved up in weight class to face him. He fought only 3 times at 140 before jumping up to face Oscar at 147. As for all the other stoppages 1. They call came after the 3 Ward fights. 2. Mayweather can punch at 140, Floyd was in him prime, and 140 is arguably his best weight. Oh, and he's the best fighter of our generation. 3. The Gomez and Baldy fights were at WW. Gatti never beat anybody decent at 147 and we all know he was shot at that point.
Many referees would have stopped Gatti/Ward 1 in round 9. He was out on his feet and taking shots. Go youtube it.
Froch has beaten TWO above average fighters. Yes, he beat a FORMER p4p fighter (from a lower weight class) after losing the first 8 rounds and getting knocked on his ass. In Calzaghe's whole career, he was never made to look as crappy as Taylor made Froch look for most of the fight. I don't ever remember Calzaghe needing a KO to win.
Here's a list of guys that Ward beat that are equal or near equal p4p to Froch's second best win, Pascal:
Gatti, Green, Augustus, Sanchez and Neary.
You'll see by the time Froch's career is over. Last week was probably his high water mark.
Let's say Miranda beats Ward and Dirrell becomes Froch's mandatory. He could very well lose that fight. Seriously. If Ward beats Miranda, I wouldn't be shocked if Ward beats Froch.
Pound for pound, I'd certainly give the edge to Froch, but if I had to compare Froch to somebody p4p from Ward's era and weight class, I'd probably say he's around the level of a prime Sharma Mitchell. A solid top 5-10 fighter in his weight class.
No offense taken Sean we can agree to disagree. I seem to remember Julio Ceaser Chavez looking one dimensional, slow and poor for most of the first Meldrick Taylor fight but I assume you wouldn't suggest he's only a Sharmba Mitchell level guy, nor that Taylor is not on the same level as Meldrick Taylor.
Froch looked bad and struggled for a few rounds but he got himself right back into the fight.
Breaking it down it was only round 3 where he looked awful. Round 1 not a lot happened, quite a few observers actually gave Froch round 2, certainly it wasn't a one sided round for Taylor, then he lost round 3 big and round 4 but was already coming back into the fight by the end of 5th backing Taylor up with some powerful combinations in the last 30 seconds or so.
From round 6 onwards he lost at most 3 rounds, I think on my card I gave him most of them.
It's the mark of a great fighter to come back from adversity and Froch has shown he can come back.
He will win a couple more big fights before he's done, you'll see ;)
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
I'm not touchy at all mate, I enjoy these debates sorry if it comes as touchy but I never feel that way.
Anyway back on topic I can see your point although maybe I underestimate Micky Ward slightly. For me he was a tough but limited guy, on the same level as John Duddy maybe. To me he wasn't that damaging seeing as Gatti beat him 2-1 and went the distance every time whereas when he stepped up to the likes of Oscar, Floyd and even Angel Manfredy and Baldomir he got killed. If he'd have been forced to go 10 rounds with any of those guys he'd have been permenantly damaged.
I don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness. If Froch was the same size as Gatti he'd have ruined him a lot more than Ward did imo. Actually maybe that's not true as Gatti would have been stopped inside 5 or 6 rounds so maybe total damage accumalation would have been less.
But I do thing the difference in class between Ward and Froch is greater than between Froch and Calzaghe.
I'd give Froch a chance at least against Calzaghe, I'd not give Ward any chance whatosever against Ward pound for pound.
No offense, Baggins, but you are out of your mind on this one. Froch would have ZERO chance against Calzaghe. He would have ZERO chance against a true P4P talent like Prime Jones or Toney. Eubank, Benn, or Steve Collins would have destroyed him. It's not even close.
You don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness? Allow me to remind you of a few things about Gatti. The Manfredy stoppage was on a cut. Oscar was a P4P fighter in his prime and Gatti moved up in weight class to face him. He fought only 3 times at 140 before jumping up to face Oscar at 147. As for all the other stoppages 1. They call came after the 3 Ward fights. 2. Mayweather can punch at 140, Floyd was in him prime, and 140 is arguably his best weight. Oh, and he's the best fighter of our generation. 3. The Gomez and Baldy fights were at WW. Gatti never beat anybody decent at 147 and we all know he was shot at that point.
Many referees would have stopped Gatti/Ward 1 in round 9. He was out on his feet and taking shots. Go youtube it.
Froch has beaten TWO above average fighters. Yes, he beat a FORMER p4p fighter (from a lower weight class) after losing the first 8 rounds and getting knocked on his ass. In Calzaghe's whole career, he was never made to look as crappy as Taylor made Froch look for most of the fight. I don't ever remember Calzaghe needing a KO to win.
Here's a list of guys that Ward beat that are equal or near equal p4p to Froch's second best win, Pascal:
Gatti, Green, Augustus, Sanchez and Neary.
You'll see by the time Froch's career is over. Last week was probably his high water mark.
Let's say Miranda beats Ward and Dirrell becomes Froch's mandatory. He could very well lose that fight. Seriously. If Ward beats Miranda, I wouldn't be shocked if Ward beats Froch.
Pound for pound, I'd certainly give the edge to Froch, but if I had to compare Froch to somebody p4p from Ward's era and weight class, I'd probably say he's around the level of a prime Sharma Mitchell. A solid top 5-10 fighter in his weight class.
No offense taken Sean we can agree to disagree. I seem to remember Julio Ceaser Chavez looking one dimensional, slow and poor for most of the first Meldrick Taylor fight but I assume you wouldn't suggest he's only a Sharmba Mitchell level guy, nor that Taylor is not on the same level as Meldrick Taylor.
Froch looked bad and struggled for a few rounds but he got himself right back into the fight.
Breaking it down it was only round 3 where he looked awful. Round 1 not a lot happened, quite a few observers actually gave Froch round 2, certainly it wasn't a one sided round for Taylor, then he lost round 3 big and round 4 but was already coming back into the fight by the end of 5th backing Taylor up with some powerful combinations in the last 30 seconds or so.
From round 6 onwards he lost at most 3 rounds, I think on my card I gave him most of them.
It's the mark of a great fighter to come back from adversity and Froch has shown he can come back.
He will win a couple more big fights before he's done, you'll see ;)
On that I agree. I think he has some good wins in him, but I promise there will be a few losses if seriously tries to clean out 168.
There is a lot that I like about him as a fighter. He's not the fastest guy, but he is very relaxed in the ring, like Pavlik, unlike Taylor. That helps his stamina, for sure, but it also helps you take punches. When tight, hyper fighters get hit flush, all the muscle tension worsens the impact. Being relaxed also helps him keep his composure and press on even when things are going poorly. He's got a pretty good jab and he hits hard. That along makes him dangerous. I also like that one of his best punches is the uppercut. That's unusual and many guys are open for.
Still, he just isn't fast enough to be as technically flawed as he is. It's going to catch up with him sooner or later. Probably sooner. Hell, it caught up with Roy Jones eventually and Froch doesn't have a quarter of Roy's reflexes. In some ways, it makes Froch more intriguing.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RozzySean
No offense, Baggins, but you are out of your mind on this one. Froch would have ZERO chance against Calzaghe. He would have ZERO chance against a true P4P talent like Prime Jones or Toney. Eubank, Benn, or Steve Collins would have destroyed him. It's not even close.
You don't put Ward near Froch in terms of power or toughness? Allow me to remind you of a few things about Gatti. The Manfredy stoppage was on a cut. Oscar was a P4P fighter in his prime and Gatti moved up in weight class to face him. He fought only 3 times at 140 before jumping up to face Oscar at 147. As for all the other stoppages 1. They call came after the 3 Ward fights. 2. Mayweather can punch at 140, Floyd was in him prime, and 140 is arguably his best weight. Oh, and he's the best fighter of our generation. 3. The Gomez and Baldy fights were at WW. Gatti never beat anybody decent at 147 and we all know he was shot at that point.
Many referees would have stopped Gatti/Ward 1 in round 9. He was out on his feet and taking shots. Go youtube it.
Froch has beaten TWO above average fighters. Yes, he beat a FORMER p4p fighter (from a lower weight class) after losing the first 8 rounds and getting knocked on his ass. In Calzaghe's whole career, he was never made to look as crappy as Taylor made Froch look for most of the fight. I don't ever remember Calzaghe needing a KO to win.
Here's a list of guys that Ward beat that are equal or near equal p4p to Froch's second best win, Pascal:
Gatti, Green, Augustus, Sanchez and Neary.
You'll see by the time Froch's career is over. Last week was probably his high water mark.
Let's say Miranda beats Ward and Dirrell becomes Froch's mandatory. He could very well lose that fight. Seriously. If Ward beats Miranda, I wouldn't be shocked if Ward beats Froch.
Pound for pound, I'd certainly give the edge to Froch, but if I had to compare Froch to somebody p4p from Ward's era and weight class, I'd probably say he's around the level of a prime Sharma Mitchell. A solid top 5-10 fighter in his weight class.
No offense taken Sean we can agree to disagree. I seem to remember Julio Ceaser Chavez looking one dimensional, slow and poor for most of the first Meldrick Taylor fight but I assume you wouldn't suggest he's only a Sharmba Mitchell level guy, nor that Taylor is not on the same level as Meldrick Taylor.
Froch looked bad and struggled for a few rounds but he got himself right back into the fight.
Breaking it down it was only round 3 where he looked awful. Round 1 not a lot happened, quite a few observers actually gave Froch round 2, certainly it wasn't a one sided round for Taylor, then he lost round 3 big and round 4 but was already coming back into the fight by the end of 5th backing Taylor up with some powerful combinations in the last 30 seconds or so.
From round 6 onwards he lost at most 3 rounds, I think on my card I gave him most of them.
It's the mark of a great fighter to come back from adversity and Froch has shown he can come back.
He will win a couple more big fights before he's done, you'll see ;)
On that I agree. I think he has some good wins in him, but I promise there will be a few losses if seriously tries to clean out 168.
There is a lot that I like about him as a fighter. He's not the fastest guy, but he is very relaxed in the ring, like Pavlik, unlike Taylor. That helps his stamina, for sure, but it also helps you take punches. When tight, hyper fighters get hit flush, all the muscle tension worsens the impact. Being relaxed also helps him keep his composure and press on even when things are going poorly. He's got a pretty good jab and he hits hard. That along makes him dangerous. I also like that one of his best punches is the uppercut. That's unusual and many guys are open for.
Still, he just isn't fast enough to be as technically flawed as he is. It's going to catch up with him sooner or later. Probably sooner. Hell, it caught up with Roy Jones eventually and Froch doesn't have a quarter of Roy's reflexes. In some ways, it makes Froch more intriguing.
Yeah definitely he's not unbeatable but he is dangerous, very dangerous. The way he finished Taylor in the last round was clinical I was so impressed.
He didn't get over anxious, he didn't smother himself he just looked totally calm and in control, methodically picking his shots and dismantling Taylor.
I can't think of any fighter recently who has done that good a demolition job, the calmness of it I mean, there were no lunging wild shots he just took him apart in the most clinical fashion.
For me, he has the killer instinct and that will help him go a long way.
He's also highly underated as a boxer, you don't win two ABA titles, a bronze medal at the World Amatuer championships and the best boxer award and Gold medal at the Multi Nations tournament in 2001 for nothing.
His amatuer record was 88-8 which shows he's got some serious boxing skills as well. I dont think he will be outboxed as easily as people think, a lot of it was due to nerves, and also that Jermain Taylor was simply brilliant for a few rounds.
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clanger
You'd have to go back 4 or 5 years to find Calzaghe's last stoppage - and that the second time against Mario Veit.
Froch can bang from the first to the last bell and Joe is hittable and his chin is not as good as people think.
Trust me, this time next year it will be *Froch who ?* the next guy he faces, if he is a top fighter, he will beat him
-
Re: Carl Froch Is Not That Good.
Froch certainly lacks boxing ability but he does have a decent workrate,a good chin and power.
