Is Froch vs Groves worthy of PPV

rossij8 · Post by **rossij8** » 06 Nov 2013, 04:37

In my opinion, no

Londonirish · Post by **Londonirish** » 06 Nov 2013, 04:43

Why not?? There has been a lot worse PPV's then this..

You have No1 in the world against No6 and at a Great Weight...

DMA1987 · Post by **DMA1987** » 06 Nov 2013, 04:45

I would love for it not to be PPV, but I'll pay it as its a fight which I am really looking forward to.

As Irish said, there's been worse than this.

Andypittcov · Post by **Andypittcov** » 06 Nov 2013, 04:49

In comparison to previous ppv yes, in reality no

rossij8 · Post by **rossij8** » 06 Nov 2013, 05:32

Groove Armada wrote:Just fleecing the hardcore fans. Greed I think it's called.

I already pay £60 a month for Sky

Surely this type of fight should come under the standard subscription?

doctorboxing · Post by **doctorboxing** » 06 Nov 2013, 05:52

Londonirish wrote:Why not?? There has been a lot worse PPV's then this..

You have No1 in the world against No6 and at a Great Weight...

Andre Ward is still the no.1 super middleweight surely?

No, it's not worth PPV but it's an all British clash for a world title in the UK's historically marquee weight division, with a bit of grudge between the fighters so it will do OK. I hope it's a good fight but I could see Groves running for most of the night.

TopGun · Post by **TopGun** » 06 Nov 2013, 06:45

rossij8 wrote:
Groove Armada wrote:Just fleecing the hardcore fans. Greed I think it's called.
I already pay £60 a month for Sky

Surely this type of fight should come under the standard subscription?

Here here. I don't have allegedly but it is much better value for money. I blame Eddie Hearn, he loves a pound note and cares nothing for fans or anyone. Him and his old man always go on about making their boxers as much money as they can with a real cheesy grin on their faces whilst driving Bentleys. I know boxers who were with Matchroom who are now working in labouring jobs cause Eddie's old man didn't secure their futures......

15829 · Post by **15829** » 06 Nov 2013, 07:11

doctorboxing wrote:
Londonirish wrote:Why not?? There has been a lot worse PPV's then this..

You have No1 in the world against No6 and at a Great Weight...
Andre Ward is still the no.1 super middleweight surely?

No, it's not worth PPV but it's an all British clash for a world title in the UK's historically marquee weight division, with a bit of grudge between the fighters so it will do OK. I hope it's a good fight but I could see Groves running for most of the night.

AHHHH but what your forgetting is that Ward is Super number 1 leaving Froch as the regular number 1

mfc_se15 · Post by **mfc_se15** » 06 Nov 2013, 07:15

I've gone for no as in truth I don't think any fights are really worth paying extra for if you already subscribe to sky. That said it doesn't stop me from making the occasional purchase of these sort of fights and I will be watching this one somewhere (hopefully a pub).

Plus in fairness I've seen/heard a lot of people talking about this fight so it has to an extent caught peoples attention so from a producers point of view its probably worthy of PPV.

The_Don1 · Post by **The_Don1** » 06 Nov 2013, 07:17

If the card was stacked with quality as Hearn promised then yes, but it isn't so no.

ILikeBeer · Post by **ILikeBeer** » 06 Nov 2013, 07:54

I'll probably order it. I don't have Sky Sports, but can order it via my Virgin Box.

To be honest, I'd rather pay for this than I would Haye vs Fury, which I was going to watch in the pub on principle.

mullenman · Post by **mullenman** » 06 Nov 2013, 07:56

i will buy it no problem but i am very annoyed with the undercard

looks very weak

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:21

Eddie Hearn said late last year - there are only two fights that are PPV able in 2013.

Froch vs Kessler
Hatton vs Khan.

So thats the answer.

Flump · Post by **Flump** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:23

The_Don1 wrote:If the card was stacked with quality as Hearn promised then yes, but it isn't so no.

This. Unless the main event is a proper top level matchup then the undercard has to be sh1tting Tiffany cufflinks to make it PPV IMO.

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:30

TopGun wrote:
rossij8 wrote:
Groove Armada wrote:Just fleecing the hardcore fans. Greed I think it's called.
I already pay £60 a month for Sky

Surely this type of fight should come under the standard subscription?

Here here. I don't have Allegedly Channel but it is much better value for money. I blame Eddie Hearn, he loves a pound note and cares nothing for fans or anyone. Him and his old man always go on about making their boxers as much money as they can with a real cheesy grin on their faces whilst driving Bentleys. I know boxers who were with Matchroom who are now working in labouring jobs cause Eddie's old man didn't secure their futures......

fornicate off! No boxers ever have a bad word to say about Matchroom!

lefty · Post by **lefty** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:31

The_Don1 wrote:If the card was stacked with quality as Hearn promised then yes, but it isn't so no.

Yeah, I thought he said the undercard was gonna be "stacked"?

milpool · Post by **milpool** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:32

Good fight, but PPV? No, not for me it isn't. In saying that, I'll probably pay for it thus encouraging future PPV's. More fool me...

chad · Post by **chad** » 06 Nov 2013, 08:47

Personally I don't think it's worth PPV and won't be paying for it. I'll happily wait 7 days to catch the replay on SKY Sports.

I suppose it comes down to whether people think it's good value or not. If people are preapred to pay then clearly they feel it is worthy of PPV.

PPV will only remain in the UK as long as they do decent buy rates.

TheCobra · Post by **TheCobra** » 06 Nov 2013, 10:48

It's on the borderline, I said no, it's just not quite big enough a fight for me. they need to be really careful with PPV after the previous disasters. I know Froch is a safe pair of hands in that respect compared to clowns like Haye/Harrison, but I still think this one is pushing at the boundary for what is acceptable.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 06 Nov 2013, 11:15

I wish I could dump Sky Sports and just buy Sky Boxing content.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 06 Nov 2013, 11:17

I guess I pay Sky about £750 a year with PPVs thrown in…

I’d bet at the very best 10% of that goes to boxing. But maybe the sport does well out of all those football fans who wouldn’t pay to watch it. I’ve no idea.

macaca · Post by **macaca** » 06 Nov 2013, 11:21

could be, won't be, groves chicken dance round 5

expe · Post by **expe** » 06 Nov 2013, 18:17

100% no, the undercard is Gethin-Crolla, Fielding against some Guyanan and Quigg is defending against Diego Oscar Silva - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer, which is an absolute shocker of a defence, even Calzaghe usually fought against better than that.

IRLangmaid25 · Post by **IRLangmaid25** » 06 Nov 2013, 21:17

On it's own, maybe not. But when you have Scott Quigg in a World title fight, Anthony Crolla and Martin Gethin in a crossroads match up for the British Lightweight title, plus some good prospects in Rocky Fielding and Anthony Joshua then is looks far more value for money.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Nov 2013, 21:58

IRLangmaid25 wrote:But when you have Scott Quigg in a World title fight,

His opponent is ranked 85th in the world. The fight is absolute garbage.

IRLangmaid25 wrote:Anthony Crolla and Martin Gethin in a crossroads match up for the British Lightweight title,

Crolla is above Gethin and moving up, Gethin is moving down. It's the opposite of a crossroads match.

Gethin is one of the weakest reigning British champions (he's the weakest in my opinion). It's merely a decent undercard fight.