Froch is THE worst boxer I have EVER seen

[Hulk]

Calzaghe wasn't all that technically brilliant himself.

But it works for him.

And to a lesser degree it works for Froch as well.

Both of them have a lot of grit.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJGJo...1&feature=fvwp

Just because...

[Kev]

Just because he is unorthadox doesn't mean he is bad. Clearly by definition he is one of the best boxers in the world in his weight class as he has wins against top opposition and even his only loss was a close and ferocious battle.

It's ludicrous to say people overate him so much and then call him the worst boxer ever, even if it is in jest.

He's world class, maybe not in fundamentals, but certainly in getting results.

Also how is he overated exactly? I mean he's one of those guys, like Kelly Pavlik, like Vic Darchinynan, like Antonio Margarito, that all anyone wants to talk about is his limitations.

He's still virtually unknown in Britain thanks to the zero exposure he gets so he's not overhyped either.

It's ironic really, but guys like Froch, Kelly Pavlik etc are the boxers who are actually amongst the most underated, because all people do is post about how shit they are.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

Just because he is unorthadox doesn't mean he is bad. Clearly by definition he is one of the best boxers in the world in his weight class as he has wins against top opposition and even his only loss was a close and ferocious battle.

It's ludicrous to say people overate him so much and then call him the worst boxer ever, even if it is in jest.

He's world class, maybe not in fundamentals, but certainly in getting results.

Also how is he overated exactly? I mean he's one of those guys, like Kelly Pavlik, like Vic Darchinynan, like Antonio Margarito, that all anyone wants to talk about is his limitations.

He's still virtually unknown in Britain thanks to the zero exposure he gets so he's not overhyped either.

It's ironic really, but guys like Froch, Kelly Pavlik etc are the boxers who are actually amongst the most underated, because all people do is post about how shit they are.

Think of it as free advertising...

[johnsebastianmiran]

Besides the obvious with his hands being low, Carl Froch's legs were wide and not placed one behind the other when he got tagged. Whenever he makes this mistake, movement out of harm's way is a dice throw. That's why he is considered and exciting yet unorthodox fighter. Piss poor balance when he stands in front of an opponent and oh yes, lots of arm punches from this position. Some of his fights are longer because of this. Abraham reminds me of Chris Eubanks and he will destroy all Froch's attempts at power shots if he gets wind of the balance deficit from his inability to correct his stance and maintain a rhythm.

[amat]

Bilbo is right, underrated by product of being overrated or popular. At the end of the day he's DEFINITELY one of the best 6 fighters in the division and honestly I did not believe that I have picked against him his last 4 fights.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

Bilbo is right, underrated by product of being overrated or popular. At the end of the day he's DEFINITELY one of the best 6 fighters in the division and honestly I did not believe that I have picked against him his last 4 fights.

I can

[amat]

I was missing a period there. I can believe I've picked against him, I just didn't believe he was a top fighter not at all.

[Kev]

Bilbo is right, underrated by product of being overrated or popular. At the end of the day he's DEFINITELY one of the best 6 fighters in the division and honestly I did not believe that I have picked against him his last 4 fights.

He's not even overated by anyone though. I mean apart from HattontheHomo who else in the entire boxing world overates Carl Froch?

And overhyped? Apart from the hardcore boxing fans on this forum nobody in the UK or US has even heard of him.

It's ridiculous, yes he talks himself up a lot but self promotion doesn't equal other people believing he's special.

He has limitations, just as many boxers do.

The thing is, when a fighter has good fundamentals, or a great defense, or superb athleticism, all of his negative attributes tend to get completely overlooked, whereas if a fighter has a weak chin, or is slow, or throws wide looping shots for example they get ripped apart by 'experts' like Taeth who show us why they are so poor and then ask us to explain how we know so little as to have concluded they were good. These kind of threads annoy me. They just highlight an obvious point that everybody is aware of and then talk as if it's only the sage boxing wisdom of the thread starter that has deduced this and that we, the illiterare need to be informed.