Carl Froch vs. James DeGale.

[VG_Addict]

Who would win?

[Master]

Hungry, fresh and strong Froch would wipe out De Gale but this current one may not be bothered to fight him.

[brocktonblockbust]

Froch digs deep, still wins it.

[SlimTrae]

War Froch War!

[brocktonblockbust]

War Froch War!

King Carl eat Calzones for breakfast every day of the week, bitches!

[1-hit Wonder]

I think this is one fight too far for Froch. Degale's just too quick and awkward for me. Precisely the style of fighter Froch struggles with. If it happens I'm thinking a close decision for Degale who's really impressed me in his last few outings.

[BIG H]

I think this is one fight too far for Froch. Degale's just too quick and awkward for me. Precisely the style of fighter Froch struggles with. If it happens I'm thinking a close decision for Degale who's really impressed me in his last few outings.

^^ Could be right there.

[Dia bando]

War Froch War!

King Carl eat Calzones for breakfast every day of the week, bitches!

In a pig's eye .

[Primo Carnera]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

[erics44]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

i hear what you are saying dude but is this not utter bollox really

[Primo Carnera]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

i hear what you are saying dude but is this not utter bollox really

Not sure what you mean, but you don't take the title from a champion by "shading" rounds or boxing for 1 or 1/2 minutes a round. Any doubt and the Champion gets given the round. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Clear?

[Tam Seddon]

James DeGale's Fight Options: Fielding, Kessler, Dirrell - Boxing News

[erics44]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

i hear what you are saying dude but is this not utter bollox really

Not sure what you mean, but you don't take the title from a champion by "shading" rounds or boxing for 1 or 1/2 minutes a round. Any doubt and the Champion gets given the round. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Clear?

dude, again i hear what you are saying and i hear people say that a lot

but really its a myth (utter bollox)

plenty of people have nicked titles

its more true that you dont take a title from a fighter unless you win big because you are fighting in their back yard under their promotion

at times you can win big and still not win the title (ricky burns v raymund beltrum)

if a champion takes his title to another fighters back yard under the challengers promotion then the champion often has to win big (ricky burns v roman martinez)

in fact, if any fighter is fighting another fighter in their back yard under their promotion then they usually have to win big title or no title (prescott v Mclousky and many more)

i wont finish my post with "Clear?" because that would be gay

[Primo Carnera]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

i hear what you are saying dude but is this not utter bollox really

Not sure what you mean, but you don't take the title from a champion by "shading" rounds or boxing for 1 or 1/2 minutes a round. Any doubt and the Champion gets given the round. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Clear?

dude, again i hear what you are saying and i hear people say that a lot

but really its a myth (utter bollox)

plenty of people have nicked titles

its more true that you dont take a title from a fighter unless you win big because you are fighting in their back yard under their promotion

at times you can win big and still not win the title (ricky burns v raymund beltrum)

if a champion takes his title to another fighters back yard under the challengers promotion then the champion often has to win big (ricky burns v roman martinez)

in fact, if any fighter is fighting another fighter in their back yard under their promotion then they usually have to win big title or no title (prescott v Mclousky and many more)

i wont finish my post with "Clear?" because that would be gay

Ok , here we go again! "plenty of people have nicked titles" OK my Pedigree Chum (forgive me, if that's "Gay" , but Who?
I agree about fighters in their opponents back yard or on their promotion bill. The old saying" you have to knock him out just to get a draw " is relevant all around the World, including the UK.
an example of what I'm saying is Froch v Groves 1 . At least one Judge had the Rounds even (one point difference for the knockdown.) when it was clear to everyone that Froch only won one round out of 8! I don't believe that is just about the promotion or the location, that is about taking a World Title.
Having said that I believe we aren't very far away from each other in what we're saying, probably both spitting hairs a bit. CLEAR?

[erics44]

Froch Clearly can't be bothered with the fight, but if it's made, he won't take Degale lightly , he learnt that lesson from the Groves fights to be fair. If the fight is made , Froch will win on points. To take the title on points , you have to win rounds pretty convincingly and I don't think Degale works hard enough for 3 minutes every round to do that. admittedly , his last 2 fights have been much better, but I'm not totally convinced. I'm not convinced Degale would beat Groves either, and within 18 months , Callum Smith will mop the lot up.

i hear what you are saying dude but is this not utter bollox really

Not sure what you mean, but you don't take the title from a champion by "shading" rounds or boxing for 1 or 1/2 minutes a round. Any doubt and the Champion gets given the round. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Clear?

dude, again i hear what you are saying and i hear people say that a lot

but really its a myth (utter bollox)

plenty of people have nicked titles

its more true that you dont take a title from a fighter unless you win big because you are fighting in their back yard under their promotion

at times you can win big and still not win the title (ricky burns v raymund beltrum)

if a champion takes his title to another fighters back yard under the challengers promotion then the champion often has to win big (ricky burns v roman martinez)

in fact, if any fighter is fighting another fighter in their back yard under their promotion then they usually have to win big title or no title (prescott v Mclousky and many more)

i wont finish my post with "Clear?" because that would be gay

Ok , here we go again! "plenty of people have nicked titles" OK my Pedigree Chum (forgive me, if that's "Gay" , but Who?
I agree about fighters in their opponents back yard or on their promotion bill. The old saying" you have to knock him out just to get a draw " is relevant all around the World, including the UK.
an example of what I'm saying is Froch v Groves 1 . At least one Judge had the Rounds even (one point difference for the knockdown.) when it was clear to everyone that Froch only won one round out of 8! I don't believe that is just about the promotion or the location, that is about taking a World Title.
Having said that I believe we aren't very far away from each other in what we're saying, probably both spitting hairs a bit. CLEAR?

you are saying a challenger has to win big to win a title

i am saying the non promotional fighter has to win big to win, title or not

theres a massive difference

and i already gave an example of a challenger nicking a title in burns v martinez

and yes saying the words pedigree chum on a boxing forum is gay

as is capitalising stuff and putting stuff in quotes