The lack of power at 175 must make you question how he beats him, Froch isn't light years ahead of Clev when it comes to boxing ability. I think he'd take it too, but it would have been a good fight, much better than either Mack or the Kovalev fight.Riddick Blowe wrote: Give over! How could you read my post and not know if I would pick Froch over Cleverly? Did you think the 7lb weight difference is enough to sway my opinion?
Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
I think it would have looked like Froch/Bute but Clev would last maybe 6 or 7 painful rounds because he is brave. Not sure why you assume Froch wouldn't have the power to hurt Nate when we already established the levels thing. Clev has absolutely nothing to keep Froch off him. The concept of Nate outboxing anyone good is odd to me. People look at him and think because he has good handspeed and no power he must be some slick boxer to compensate, but he isn't.SNG wrote:The lack of power at 175 must make you question how he beats him, Froch isn't light years ahead of Clev when it comes to boxing ability. I think he'd take it too, but it would have been a good fight, much better than either Mack or the Kovalev fight.Riddick Blowe wrote: Give over! How could you read my post and not know if I would pick Froch over Cleverly? Did you think the 7lb weight difference is enough to sway my opinion?
Anyway, to save everyone's time it's probably better to agree to disagree on this early because I can see how it's going to unfold.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Agree to disagree on what exactly? Did you even read what I wrote?Riddick Blowe wrote:I think it would have looked like Froch/Bute but Clev would last maybe 6 or 7 painful rounds because he is brave. Not sure why you assume Froch wouldn't have the power to hurt Nate when we already established the levels thing. Clev has absolutely nothing to keep Froch off him. The concept of Nate outboxing anyone good is odd to me. People look at him and think because he has good handspeed and no power he must be some slick boxer to compensate, but he isn't.SNG wrote:The lack of power at 175 must make you question how he beats him, Froch isn't light years ahead of Clev when it comes to boxing ability. I think he'd take it too, but it would have been a good fight, much better than either Mack or the Kovalev fight.Riddick Blowe wrote: Give over! How could you read my post and not know if I would pick Froch over Cleverly? Did you think the 7lb weight difference is enough to sway my opinion?
Anyway, to save everyone's time it's probably better to agree to disagree on this early because I can see how it's going to unfold.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
I meant agree to disagree on how the fight would go, doofus. You said it would be a good fight, I disagreed.SNG wrote:
Agree to disagree on what exactly? Did you even read what I wrote?
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Doofus, really?Riddick Blowe wrote:I meant agree to disagree on how the fight would go, doofus. You said it would be a good fight, I disagreed.SNG wrote:
Agree to disagree on what exactly? Did you even read what I wrote?
I've tried to have a serious conversation with you about how this fight would go and all I've gotten from you is arsey responses and now name calling. Are you 12 years old or just a cunt?
fornicate it, you're going on ignore, you bore the fornicate out of me.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Wow, you took offence at doofus. Do everyone a favour and wash the sand out of your vagina.SNG wrote:Doofus, really?Riddick Blowe wrote:I meant agree to disagree on how the fight would go, doofus. You said it would be a good fight, I disagreed.SNG wrote:
Agree to disagree on what exactly? Did you even read what I wrote?
I've tried to have a serious conversation with you about how this fight would go and all I've gotten from you is arsey responses and now name calling. Are you 12 years old or just a cunt?
eff it, you're going on ignore, you bore the eff out of me.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
DD - why do you think Cleverly wins?
He doesn't have the power of a Kessler to outbrawl Froch. He isn't close to being slick like Dirrell and Ward to make Froch miss/frustrated, so how does he win?
Froch showed against Bute - whose chin may well be as good as if not better than Cleverly - that he is very good at cutting the ring off and catching his opponent. Infact Bute is probably better than Cleverly.
He doesn't have the power of a Kessler to outbrawl Froch. He isn't close to being slick like Dirrell and Ward to make Froch miss/frustrated, so how does he win?
Froch showed against Bute - whose chin may well be as good as if not better than Cleverly - that he is very good at cutting the ring off and catching his opponent. Infact Bute is probably better than Cleverly.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
I don't. I think Froch wins, I said that.DMA1987 wrote:DD - why do you think Cleverly wins?
He doesn't have the power of a Kessler to outbrawl Froch. He isn't close to being slick like Dirrell and Ward to make Froch miss/frustrated, so how does he win?
Froch showed against Bute - whose chin may well be as good as if not better than Cleverly - that he is very good at cutting the ring off and catching his opponent. Infact Bute is probably better than Cleverly.
The thing with the Bute fight is that he stood on the ropes eating what Cark threw, I don't think Nathen would do that. I think Carl can beat him with his jab but I also think Clev is good enough to take rounds off him. I just don't see how Froch stops him or beats him as easily as people make out. It's meaningless anyway, there's no way it happens now.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Do you think Clev has the heart to beat a Carl Froch?SNG wrote:I don't. I think Froch wins, I said that.DMA1987 wrote:DD - why do you think Cleverly wins?
He doesn't have the power of a Kessler to outbrawl Froch. He isn't close to being slick like Dirrell and Ward to make Froch miss/frustrated, so how does he win?
Froch showed against Bute - whose chin may well be as good as if not better than Cleverly - that he is very good at cutting the ring off and catching his opponent. Infact Bute is probably better than Cleverly.
The thing with the Bute fight is that he stood on the ropes eating what Cark threw, I don't think Nathen would do that. I think Carl can beat him with his jab but I also think Clev is good enough to take rounds off him. I just don't see how Froch stops him or beats him as easily as people make out. It's meaningless anyway, there's no way it happens now.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
No. I think he'd lose a 8-4/9-3 type of decision.
Re: Cleverley interview with Tris Dixon (Good Honest Interview)
Great interview. I'd have another go if I was Clev with a new trainer. He's young and fresh and can still make a good living on the European n fringe world scene. Warmed to him a lot after reading that. Hope he deals with the defeat on his own terms