Round-By-Round - George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - October 14th 2017
-
wesshaw1985
- Middleweight
- Posts: 7483
- Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 17:57
Round-By-Round - George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - October 14th 2017
who wins?
Last edited by wesshaw1985 on 14 Oct 2017, 17:09, edited 3 times in total.
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
From everything I've seen, Groves should win comprehensively. Cox will need to be every bit as good as his supporters say he can be.
-
horndawg80
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 486
- Joined: 26 Apr 2011, 00:25
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
This will be an absolute WAR! FOTY already!
I'll tell you this for free:
1) George (as much as I rate him) has had too many wars
2) Jamie will be on the phone to Paddy Fitz exploiting all the weaknesses of GG
3) I've read on Twitter that Jamie bamboozled George in sparring years ago (I know it means eff all)
This won't go beyond 7 or 8 rounds
Admittingly, Jamie needs to sharpen that defence slightly as Groves hits hard.
I will be getting tickets 150%!
I'll tell you this for free:
1) George (as much as I rate him) has had too many wars
2) Jamie will be on the phone to Paddy Fitz exploiting all the weaknesses of GG
3) I've read on Twitter that Jamie bamboozled George in sparring years ago (I know it means eff all)
This won't go beyond 7 or 8 rounds
Admittingly, Jamie needs to sharpen that defence slightly as Groves hits hard.
I will be getting tickets 150%!
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Groves by a mile
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Didn't Cox drop Dubois in sparring?
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Coco wrote:Didn't Cox drop Dubois in sparring?
Cox is the anti-AJ when it comes to sparring
The thought of an AJ-Cox sparring session makes my head hurt. Poor Josh...
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 22949
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Fitz unfortunately doesn't know any of George's weaknesses, or strengths, hence him getting the sack.horndawg80 wrote:This will be an absolute WAR! FOTY already!
I'll tell you this for free:
1) George (as much as I rate him) has had too many wars
2) Jamie will be on the phone to Paddy Fitz exploiting all the weaknesses of GG
3) I've read on Twitter that Jamie bamboozled George in sparring years ago (I know it means eff all)
This won't go beyond 7 or 8 rounds
Admittingly, Jamie needs to sharpen that defence slightly as Groves hits hard.
I will be getting tickets 150%!
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Groves will win in six rounds IMO. Possibly even via DQ as I think Cox may start head butting etc when he doesn't get success early
Cox didn't impress against an English level middleweight moving up and a fighter who lost to an English/area level light middleweight.
Jump in class is too big Cox hasn't won at British level now fighting at world level.I really would have liked Cox to fight Fielding or Darryl Williams before a fight like this.
Cox didn't impress against an English level middleweight moving up and a fighter who lost to an English/area level light middleweight.
Jump in class is too big Cox hasn't won at British level now fighting at world level.I really would have liked Cox to fight Fielding or Darryl Williams before a fight like this.
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Cox against a puncher?
Hmm, not a chance unless he has completely retrained himself to actually move his upper body when a punch is coming his way.
I love a war as much as the next bloke, but this guy is going to get hammered. Look at what St George did in his last fight and imagine an even easier to hit opponent.
Mind you, I'm sure George will shed some blood, just for his fans
Hmm, not a chance unless he has completely retrained himself to actually move his upper body when a punch is coming his way.
I love a war as much as the next bloke, but this guy is going to get hammered. Look at what St George did in his last fight and imagine an even easier to hit opponent.
Mind you, I'm sure George will shed some blood, just for his fans
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
What happens if they draw?
-
horndawg80
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 486
- Joined: 26 Apr 2011, 00:25
-
Boxerbeetle
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 32679
- Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Cox's best chance of victory is to push for the fight to be held in a gym behind closed doors, where he apparently always looks sensational.
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Must admit I liked the idea of this tournament when it was announced but the line up is quite poor and missing De Gale and Jack (unless he's moved up now?). Plenty of British interest though I suppose. Might be some interesting domestic match ups in the semis onwards
-
craigjenkins05
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 477
- Joined: 07 Feb 2009, 11:03
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
You have to think though if groves was bamboozled by cox in sparring why when he had first choice would he pick himhorndawg80 wrote:This will be an absolute WAR! FOTY already!
I'll tell you this for free:
1) George (as much as I rate him) has had too many wars
2) Jamie will be on the phone to Paddy Fitz exploiting all the weaknesses of GG
3) I've read on Twitter that Jamie bamboozled George in sparring years ago (I know it means eff all)
This won't go beyond 7 or 8 rounds
Admittingly, Jamie needs to sharpen that defence slightly as Groves hits hard.
I will be getting tickets 150%!
-
Jackson328
- Middleweight
- Posts: 411
- Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 14:51
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Jack is at LHW now and Degale clearly didn't fancy getting involved in the tourney, maybe it came along too late in his career and I suppose it scuppers the rematch with GG for now.ewenhay wrote:Must admit I liked the idea of this tournament when it was announced but the line up is quite poor and missing De Gale and Jack (unless he's moved up now?). Plenty of British interest though I suppose. Might be some interesting domestic match ups in the semis onwards
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
I guess I didn’t realise how weak the super middleweight division has become. Even the cruiserweight tournament seems higher quality. Any fights between Groves, Smith and Eubank will be interesting though for domestic bragging rights.Jackson328 wrote:Jack is at LHW now and Degale clearly didn't fancy getting involved in the tourney, maybe it came along too late in his career and I suppose it scuppers the rematch with GG for now.ewenhay wrote:Must admit I liked the idea of this tournament when it was announced but the line up is quite poor and missing De Gale and Jack (unless he's moved up now?). Plenty of British interest though I suppose. Might be some interesting domestic match ups in the semis onwards
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
There is plenty of talent at SMW for a higher quality tournament. For whatever reasons DeGale, Ramirez, Anthony Dirrell, and Benavidez are not involved. Any two or three of those four would have put the tourney on the same level as the CW version.ewenhay wrote:I guess I didn’t realise how weak the super middleweight division has become. Even the cruiserweight tournament seems higher quality. Any fights between Groves, Smith and Eubank will be interesting though for domestic bragging rights.Jackson328 wrote:Jack is at LHW now and Degale clearly didn't fancy getting involved in the tourney, maybe it came along too late in his career and I suppose it scuppers the rematch with GG for now.ewenhay wrote:Must admit I liked the idea of this tournament when it was announced but the line up is quite poor and missing De Gale and Jack (unless he's moved up now?). Plenty of British interest though I suppose. Might be some interesting domestic match ups in the semis onwards
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Yeah it's a good idea with the wrong line up unfortunatelyTanzio wrote:There is plenty of talent at SMW for a higher quality tournament. For whatever reasons DeGale, Ramirez, Anthony Dirrell, and Benavidez are not involved. Any two or three of those four would have put the tourney on the same level as the CW version.ewenhay wrote:I guess I didn’t realise how weak the super middleweight division has become. Even the cruiserweight tournament seems higher quality. Any fights between Groves, Smith and Eubank will be interesting though for domestic bragging rights.Jackson328 wrote:
Jack is at LHW now and Degale clearly didn't fancy getting involved in the tourney, maybe it came along too late in his career and I suppose it scuppers the rematch with GG for now.
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
I would have much preferred Smith v Dirrell and Groves v Benavidez.ewenhay wrote:Yeah it's a good idea with the wrong line up unfortunatelyTanzio wrote:There is plenty of talent at SMW for a higher quality tournament. For whatever reasons DeGale, Ramirez, Anthony Dirrell, and Benavidez are not involved. Any two or three of those four would have put the tourney on the same level as the CW version.ewenhay wrote:
I guess I didn’t realise how weak the super middleweight division has become. Even the cruiserweight tournament seems higher quality. Any fights between Groves, Smith and Eubank will be interesting though for domestic bragging rights.
-
wesshaw1985
- Middleweight
- Posts: 7483
- Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 17:57
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Saint George eventually puts a beating on cox
-
Vincent stevenson
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 154
- Joined: 22 Oct 2012, 11:15
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Im going for a huge upset here and jamie cox to win. George has struggled against strong fighters in the past albeit at a much higher level. George,s mileage is too high for me. And i think that jamie will be too much
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
George's last fight was against a strong fighter, he was swinging away at St G with power shots, relentlessly comming forward with George throwing the kitchen sink at him and still applying pressure. If that isn't a strong fighter, what is?Vincent stevenson wrote:Im going for a huge upset here and jamie cox to win. George has struggled against strong fighters in the past albeit at a much higher level. George,s mileage is too high for me. And i think that jamie will be too much
But good for you if you think Cox is going to do it, you'll make a packet if you decide to have a flutter, the odds are pretty good.
Personally I think, against all odds, George gets better each fight for the last 3 years. Of course a lot of that goes completely out the window sometimes because, bless 'em, he loves a war, and we love him for it
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
Groves all day. Cox might be good but he's unproven and is lucky to be in this tournament imo.
Re: George Groves (c) vs. Jamie Cox - TBA
I dont think Groves's mileage is that significant. IMO he's looked about as good as ever lately...
Aside from Anderson early on, only elite fighters have given him serious problems, and despite claims of stamina issues he's often busy late in fights.Okay, he fell apart vs Froch, but CF has one of the best engines 168 has seen and was the divisonal #1 at the time.
Neither Degale nor Jack were close to knocking him out, so I dont see him getting stopped by a guy who couldnt even get rid of English level Lewis Taylor a few months ago. I also have a hard time seeing the hot-headed sparring king winning on points; the tools just dont seem to be there when he actually fights.
IMO, Cox would have around 10 losses if he'd been through Groves's schedule.
Aside from Anderson early on, only elite fighters have given him serious problems, and despite claims of stamina issues he's often busy late in fights.Okay, he fell apart vs Froch, but CF has one of the best engines 168 has seen and was the divisonal #1 at the time.
Neither Degale nor Jack were close to knocking him out, so I dont see him getting stopped by a guy who couldnt even get rid of English level Lewis Taylor a few months ago. I also have a hard time seeing the hot-headed sparring king winning on points; the tools just dont seem to be there when he actually fights.
IMO, Cox would have around 10 losses if he'd been through Groves's schedule.