Froch upsets Nigel Benn

[orbtastic]

I used to think that Benn would have bust him up late but these days I'm starting to think that Froch would have outlasted him but probably had to go through hell to do it. That said, Benn was always at his most dangerous when keyed up and hurt.

As to Eubank, who can say? He was so inconsistent at 168 and you have to go on the multitude of performances he put forth there to say how a fight would go, rather than some sort of mythical Eubank that didn't stop Watson. Inconsistency was his consistency, coupled with coasting or prowling. Froch would make him work and probably that might coax the best out of Eubank.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I've no problem with that.

On the current scene I'd have been calling you a fag right about now, but here in the lvory tower of the british and irish scene, we can just shake hands and move on.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I used to think that Benn would have bust him up late but these days I'm starting to think that Froch would have outlasted him but probably had to go through hell to do it. That said, Benn was always at his most dangerous when keyed up and hurt.

As to Eubank, who can say? He was so inconsistent at 168 and you have to go on the multitude of performances he put forth there to say how a fight would go, rather than some sort of mythical Eubank that didn't stop Watson. Inconsistency was his consistency, coupled with coasting or prowling. Froch would make him work and probably that might coax the best out of Eubank.

Yes, this is the one weakness in Eubank - he didn't like to work very hard - he could when pushed, but it wasn't his MO - whilst I wouldn't call Carl a pressure fighter, he does like to put it on people.

I think it would have been a pretty close fight, one that Eubank could lose if he was having one of his off nights, or win at his best, but definitely not an easy night for either man.

I wish I had a time machine, this would be a fantastic match up.

[elev8]

Sorry, but no way does Benn stop Carl with one shot. Nobody does.

As Cilla would say, there's a lorra lorra mis-quotin' goin on lol :)
"Sorry, but no way does Benn stop Carl with one shot. Nobody does." <------ I did not say this, but am quoted as doing so on this thread repeatedly.
FWIW I think it's a ludicrous statement. Any fighter can be stopped with one shot. If it's a good enough shot.
There are no absolutes in boxing, and statements like that reek of hyperbole, tunnel-vision & bias born of fanboyism.
Of course Carl Froch could be stopped with one shot, as could any other fighter, McCall included.

[elev8]

I think you underrate Froch. He's mixed with the best in a decent era for the SMW division. I think he'd mix it 30 years ago too without being the stand-out best. I don't see how you can look though his fights and achievements and call him decent.

...and I think you over-rate him :) His record simply does not stack up against these other fighters.
The SMW division he fought in is nowhere near as rich in quality & depth of talent as that of the 80s-90s.

Carl Froch is a big fish, for sure, but in a small and sparsely populated pond.
I maintain the 3 fighters mentioned (Calzaghe, Benn, Eubank) would all defeat him.
The one possible exception is Benn, purely because he took more risks and was a lot less skilled than the other two IMO.
I'd probably go for Benn, but would not be surprised if he got beat. It'd be a great fight tho I'm sure

[freddydoesdallas]

We'll have to agree to disagree, I reckon anyone who hasn't been stopped has just never been hit perfectly

The Groves punch was as near to perfect as you can get. An absolute peach but i suppose you could also argue that Groves hasn't proven his power at the highest level

[SNG]

We'll have to agree to disagree, I reckon anyone who hasn't been stopped has just never been hit perfectly

The Groves punch was as near to perfect as you can get. An absolute peach but i suppose you could also argue that Groves hasn't proven his power at the highest level

No, Groves clearly can bang, putting down a fighter like Froch as heavily as that with one shot proves that. I swear Froch was out too on his way down.

[danamba7]

We'll have to agree to disagree, I reckon anyone who hasn't been stopped has just never been hit perfectly

The Groves punch was as near to perfect as you can get. An absolute peach but i suppose you could also argue that Groves hasn't proven his power at the highest level

No, Groves clearly can bang, putting down a fighter like Froch as heavily as that with one shot proves that. I swear Froch was out too on his way down.

Yeah he was defo out for a split second. That shot proved his chin but not as much as the punishment he took for the next 5 rounds without going down. Also some of the shots in the Pascal and Taylor fights. I remember even Johnson caught him with a peach of a right and he has power.

[danamba7]

I think you underrate Froch. He's mixed with the best in a decent era for the SMW division. I think he'd mix it 30 years ago too without being the stand-out best. I don't see how you can look though his fights and achievements and call him decent.

...and I think you over-rate him :) His record simply does not stack up against these other fighters.
The SMW division he fought in is nowhere near as rich in quality & depth of talent as that of the 80s-90s.

Carl Froch is a big fish, for sure, but in a small and sparsely populated pond.
I maintain the 3 fighters mentioned (Calzaghe, Benn, Eubank) would all defeat him.
The one possible exception is Benn, purely because he took more risks and was a lot less skilled than the other two IMO.
I'd probably go for Benn, but would not be surprised if he got beat. It'd be a great fight tho I'm sure

His record is top drawer. I won't go through it because it's been done to death. I just can't see how Froch can be seen as "decent" after some of the performances he's put in. I think we can agree he's not been blessed with the skills that please the eye (hand and foot speed, fancy combinations, Mayweather reactions) which makes it all the more impressive to me that he's achieved what he has through grit and determination with a fantastic chin, heart and stamina.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yes, Froch took some hellacious shots in the Pascal fight, that was a right old tear up, and he never came close to putting him over.

Groves caught him with an absolute pearler of a shot, and Carl was caught cold - if you can't stop him with one punch them, then when can you do it?

[elev8]

I think you underrate Froch. He's mixed with the best in a decent era for the SMW division. I think he'd mix it 30 years ago too without being the stand-out best. I don't see how you can look though his fights and achievements and call him decent.

...and I think you over-rate him :) His record simply does not stack up against these other fighters.
The SMW division he fought in is nowhere near as rich in quality & depth of talent as that of the 80s-90s.

Carl Froch is a big fish, for sure, but in a small and sparsely populated pond.
I maintain the 3 fighters mentioned (Calzaghe, Benn, Eubank) would all defeat him.
The one possible exception is Benn, purely because he took more risks and was a lot less skilled than the other two IMO.
I'd probably go for Benn, but would not be surprised if he got beat. It'd be a great fight tho I'm sure

His record is top drawer. I won't go through it because it's been done to death. I just can't see how Froch can be seen as "decent" after some of the performances he's put in. I think we can agree he's not been blessed with the skills that please the eye (hand and foot speed, fancy combinations, Mayweather reactions) which makes it all the more impressive to me that he's achieved what he has through grit and determination with a fantastic chin, heart and stamina.

With the greatest of respect, it's not about being eye-catching. I just don't think you can favourably compare his record to those of Calzaghe/Benn/Eubank. Especially given the quality of opposition around at the time. You list grit/chin/heart/stamina as his attributes, well, I'd put those 3 fighters named above all ahead of him in every one of those categories with, as previously stated, the possible exception of Benn's chin.
If you look at the pool of fighters who make up the Mid/Supermid divisions of the last 30 years, Carl Froch is decent, but not close to the top of the list IMO. Certainly those 3 fighters are all easily above him for me.
But that's why we love the game, right? Speculation & opinion but few if any definitive answers.
If I may say so, you seem to be a bit fixated on Froch in general, and my use of the term "decent" to describe him in particular. It certainly was not my intention to offend and if I have done so, then I sincerely apologise

[danamba7]

With the greatest of respect, it's not about being eye-catching. I just don't think you can favourably compare his record to those of Calzaghe/Benn/Eubank. Especially given the quality of opposition around at the time. You list grit/chin/heart/stamina as his attributes, well, I'd put those 3 fighters named above all ahead of him in every one of those categories with, as previously stated, the possible exception of Benn's chin.
If you look at the pool of fighters who make up the Mid/Supermid divisions of the last 30 years, Carl Froch is decent, but not close to the top of the list IMO. Certainly those 3 fighters are all easily above him for me.
But that's why we love the game, right? Speculation & opinion but few if any definitive answers.
If I may say so, you seem to be a bit fixated on Froch in general, and my use of the term "decent" to describe him in particular. It certainly was not my intention to offend and if I have done so, then I sincerely apologise

Yes I get a little defensive when it comes to Froch! Definitely not offended though. Agree to disagree

[elev8]

Yes I get a little defensive when it comes to Froch!

I have to ask...
Why?

...Agree to disagree

Absolutely!

[danamba7]

I have to ask...
Why?

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=192873

[whiskey]

With the greatest of respect, it's not about being eye-catching. I just don't think you can favourably compare his record to those of Calzaghe/Benn/Eubank. Especially given the quality of opposition around at the time. You list grit/chin/heart/stamina as his attributes, well, I'd put those 3 fighters named above all ahead of him in every one of those categories with, as previously stated, the possible exception of Benn's chin.
If you look at the pool of fighters who make up the Mid/Supermid divisions of the last 30 years, Carl Froch is decent, but not close to the top of the list IMO. Certainly those 3 fighters are all easily above him for me.
But that's why we love the game, right? Speculation & opinion but few if any definitive answers.
If I may say so, you seem to be a bit fixated on Froch in general, and my use of the term "decent" to describe him in particular. It certainly was not my intention to offend and if I have done so, then I sincerely apologise

What an absolute pile of shít.

Froch's record doesn't compare to Calzaghe / Eubank / Benn ? Steve Collins must be a TBE then.

And you state that it's a shallow division since Froch operated in it ?

Get the eff out of here, troll boy

[elev8]

With the greatest of respect, it's not about being eye-catching. I just don't think you can favourably compare his record to those of Calzaghe/Benn/Eubank. Especially given the quality of opposition around at the time. You list grit/chin/heart/stamina as his attributes, well, I'd put those 3 fighters named above all ahead of him in every one of those categories with, as previously stated, the possible exception of Benn's chin.
If you look at the pool of fighters who make up the Mid/Supermid divisions of the last 30 years, Carl Froch is decent, but not close to the top of the list IMO. Certainly those 3 fighters are all easily above him for me.
But that's why we love the game, right? Speculation & opinion but few if any definitive answers.
If I may say so, you seem to be a bit fixated on Froch in general, and my use of the term "decent" to describe him in particular. It certainly was not my intention to offend and if I have done so, then I sincerely apologise

What an absolute pile of shít.

Froch's record doesn't compare to Calzaghe / Eubank / Benn ?

And you state that it's a shallow division since Froch operated in it ?

Get the eff out of here, troll boy

Pot/Kettle :)
Yes.
Not exactly, but close enough so Yes.
Referring to me as troll in a post with name-calling, yet nothing justified, backed up or substantiated. Irony.

[mickey1975]

I've been Froch's biggest critic on here for years, but he's won me over. Losing to Ward means nothing, he's almost unbeatable in my eyes and he avenged the Kessler loss. Benn could not have won a round against Ward. Froch would 100% have stopped Benn. He wasn't landing anything harder than Groves did.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Both Calzaghe and Eubank had some DREADFUL defences in their record - it's laughable to suggest that Froch's record doesn't compare. Calzaghe fought Mario Veit - one of the rare times he had a WBO mandatory to fulfil - not once but twice!! Calzaghe's dad had to practically beg him to face Lacy, and Calzaghe claimed for years that he couldn't go to America to fight, because he was terrified of flying, yet somehow was able to go and fight in Vegas against Hopkins. He also wrote in his autobiography that he'd never fight Roy Jones

Truth is Calzaghe was shite scared of losing his 0 - and didn't like fighting away from home. Had he not finally grown a set of bollocks and fought Lacy and Kessler - his career would have been a joke.

Eubank took the piss with his crappy defences, but he had the fights with Benn, Collins and Watson not to mention Thompson, to prove he was no coward.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Both Calzaghe and Eubank had some DREADFUL defences in their record - it's laughable to suggest that Froch's record doesn't compare. Calzaghe fought Mario Veit - one of the rare times he had a WBO mandatory to fulfil - not once but twice!! Calzaghe's dad had to practically beg him to face Lacy, and Calzaghe claimed for years that he couldn't go to America to fight, because he was terrified of flying, yet somehow was able to go and fight in Vegas against Hopkins. He also wrote in his autobiography that he'd never fight Roy Jones

Truth is Calzaghe was shite scared of losing his 0 - and didn't like fighting away from home. Had he not finally grown a set of bollocks and fought Lacy and Kessler - his career would have been a joke.

Eubank took the piss with his crappy defences, but he had the fights with Benn, Collins and Watson not to mention Thompson, to prove he was no coward.

Also worth pointing out, that neither, Benn or Eubank ever faced Toney or RJJ, who were considered the top men.

Froch has faced all of the top men in his division - sure, he lost a couple along the way, but so what. If Benn and Eubank had faced those two, there would definitely have been another loss on both their records, and possibly 2. Toney would have destroyed Benn for sure, and RJJ would have whupped both of them.

Fact is, Carl has faced his challenges.

Nobody is asking you to proclaim him the second coming, but to suggest he is 'decent' is patently ridiculous.

[danamba7]

I've been Froch's biggest critic on here for years, but he's won me over. Losing to Ward means nothing, he's almost unbeatable in my eyes and he avenged the Kessler loss. Benn could not have won a round against Ward. Froch would 100% have stopped Benn. He wasn't landing anything harder than Groves did.

Means a lot coming from Mickey

[Grilling Machine]

RJJ would have whupped both of them.

As much as I agree with that, I think Jones would've brought out The Best from old Senior. Beaten, yeah, but I can't see anyone from history whupping Eubank apart from Robinson (Langford-Eubank would've been terrifying for everyone!). I think he'd have 'Benned' Jones, going all-out, against type, in a brawl. Maybe the ref woulda stepped-in down the road, but there's no way he'd have stood for being shown up.

I'd give Benn a pretty good chance against Ward, too. Ward's never faced anyone that fierce, and he doesn't punch like McClellan. I'd doubt his fortitude against Benn's in a war, so he'd have to maintain his superior skills to the final bell without any blips. Fencing and hustling.

[whiskey]

RJJ would have whupped both of them.

As much as I agree with that, I think Jones would've brought out The Best from old Senior. Beaten, yeah, but I can't see anyone from history whupping Eubank apart from Robinson (Langford-Eubank would've been terrifying for everyone!). I think he'd have 'Benned' Jones, going all-out, against type, in a brawl. Maybe the ref woulda stepped-in down the road, but there's no way he'd have stood for being shown up.

I'd give Benn a pretty good chance against Ward, too. Ward's never faced anyone that fierce, and he doesn't punch like McClellan. I'd doubt his fortitude against Benn's in a war, so he'd have to maintain his superior skills to the final bell without any blips. Fencing and hustling.

Let's see what Roy Jones does to Malinga - a man who gave torrid fights to Eubank & Benn :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n05g8AC7p8

Now watch Eubank against Malinga

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIO9zLS7UjA

I'm sorry but Jones would have absolutely clowned Eubank and Benn on the same night. I understand liking and supporting a fighter - but seriously, they'd not even beat James Toney in that era. I wished they tried.

[elev8]

RJJ would have whupped both of them.

As much as I agree with that, I think Jones would've brought out The Best from old Senior. Beaten, yeah, but I can't see anyone from history whupping Eubank apart from Robinson (Langford-Eubank would've been terrifying for everyone!). I think he'd have 'Benned' Jones, going all-out, against type, in a brawl. Maybe the ref woulda stepped-in down the road, but there's no way he'd have stood for being shown up.

I'd give Benn a pretty good chance against Ward, too. Ward's never faced anyone that fierce, and he doesn't punch like McClellan. I'd doubt his fortitude against Benn's in a war, so he'd have to maintain his superior skills to the final bell without any blips. Fencing and hustling.

That's the point. Nobody ever "clowned" Eubank. He was only ever stopped when he was totally a spent force and even then under adverse circumstances. He famously only did just enough to win, but he always found a way. And a good number of his title defences were post-Watson, when he had lost the instinct/desire/will to stop fighters inside the distance.
Only a few fighters in history could have even done that, and one outcome of it is that we will never know how good he truly was.
Fine boxing skills, big punch, tricky unorthodox style, adaptable to out-think and cope with anyone, and a chin of steel. He had everything, simple as that.

[whiskey]

That's the point. Nobody ever "clowned" Eubank.

Eubank's defence was underated. Why swerve blows when you can swerve entire fights ?

[elev8]

So Eubank was "smart". Pretty sure we already knew that lol