BoxRec

Final round wrote:

palooka wrote:

tobyh5 wrote:Who cares who was winning until the end. You lot sound like my 8 year old when we play pool and when he pots one he does a little dance and I remind him it is not about who is winning but at the end who WON!

12 round fight, object of exercise is to win more rounds than the other man or find a way to stop him completing the 12 rounds.

Objective achieved.

Bet your 8 year old adores you.

Competitive Dad!

Hey, I take my wins where I can !

IFL TV interview with Groves after the fight and he was on about how well he was doing and that Froch is not that good technically as he is happy to take shots to land his own. Uhm, that is because it is a fist fight and he is there to win no matter how. He is a hard SOB and is more than happy to absorb a few shots in order to land his bigger ones.

People are debating technical abilities and skills and who was winning and need to stop being so hung up on silly little details.It was a fight and Froch won it regardless of what Groves may or may not have been doing. He may have been losing the fight, if you feel that way, but he was doing better than the last fight against a man many of you feel is superior technically, he was executing his own plan, he was stopping Groves getting on top to a degree of the first fight and was inflicting enough damage to keep Groves from pulling out his own plan, then he saw an opening and detonated.


Let's be honest, most of us would rather be the hard bastard than the annoying pot shot but skilful kid.

Well after the first fight and the massive build up it would have been extremely difficult for the action to live up to expectations.
As a boxing fan I thought the whole card was great (did anyone else notice we didn't have one fight go to cards?). Yes a couple of mismatches but some cracking and dramatic fights too.
The problem with an event like this is you get 80,000 people in Wembley who are not all boxing fans, hence it seems that at times there was a lack of appreciation for some of the fighters (McDonnell now 2 time champ, Mitchell great comeback) and the booing in the main event was a bit unfair.

Going into this I was really 50/50. Could Froch be any better and could Groves repeat what he did the first time? I felt in the build up that Froch was handling the prefight stuff better and Groves was putting too much emphasis in trying to get to Carl again. However it transpired that Carl was switched on this time and I felt Groves found out quickly he was not going to get the same opportunities he did in the first fight. Saying that I couldn't split them going into the 8th round on the cards ( the judges were 2-1 to Froch) but it didn't matter. What a punch, sweet as a nut and will be on highlight reels for years to come.

As Carl said this was his legacy fight. Not because George is the best he has fought but because of the occasion and because of the doubters predicting his demise. Let him go to Vegas and fight Chavez or Ward. He has earned the right to do whatever he wants. For George he can come back again. He has taken an elite super middle to the brink over a couple of fights and he is still only 26. For me his inexperience was his biggest weakness in both fights.

As for all the Sky bashers. They are the only broadcaster prepared to put up the cash. We should be thankful we have them. However, it is time to put Jim Watt to retirement and find someone to replace Nick Halling. I thought Paulie was a breath of fresh air and made some pointed and detailed observations. I cringe when Nick and Jim get into one of their diatribes. It is like they focus on one theme and continue it for the whole fight regardless of the other factors.

All said, wasn't it great to see boxing on a huge stage. 80,000 people, 1m box office subscribers and live on HBO in the US. I loved it.

Thejambo wrote:Well after the first fight and the massive build up it would have been extremely difficult for the action to live up to expectations.
As a boxing fan I thought the whole card was great (did anyone else notice we didn't have one fight go to cards?). Yes a couple of mismatches but some cracking and dramatic fights too.
The problem with an event like this is you get 80,000 people in Wembley who are not all boxing fans, hence it seems that at times there was a lack of appreciation for some of the fighters (McDonnell now 2 time champ, Mitchell great comeback) and the booing in the main event was a bit unfair.

Going into this I was really 50/50. Could Froch be any better and could Groves repeat what he did the first time? I felt in the build up that Froch was handling the prefight stuff better and Groves was putting too much emphasis in trying to get to Carl again. However it transpired that Carl was switched on this time and I felt Groves found out quickly he was not going to get the same opportunities he did in the first fight. Saying that I couldn't split them going into the 8th round on the cards ( the judges were 2-1 to Froch) but it didn't matter. What a punch, sweet as a nut and will be on highlight reels for years to come.

As Carl said this was his legacy fight. Not because George is the best he has fought but because of the occasion and because of the doubters predicting his demise. Let him go to Vegas and fight Chavez or Ward. He has earned the right to do whatever he wants. For George he can come back again. He has taken an elite super middle to the brink over a couple of fights and he is still only 26. For me his inexperience was his biggest weakness in both fights.

As for all the Sky bashers. They are the only broadcaster prepared to put up the cash. We should be thankful we have them. However, it is time to put Jim Watt to retirement and find someone to replace Nick Halling. I thought Paulie was a breath of fresh air and made some pointed and detailed observations. I cringe when Nick and Jim get into one of their diatribes. It is like they focus on one theme and continue it for the whole fight regardless of the other factors.

All said, wasn't it great to see boxing on a huge stage. 80,000 people, 1m box office subscribers and live on HBO in the US. I loved it.

Good post and it's nice to see someone being positive about it, I think we get into a routine of critism and cynical - nice to read a different post.

These posts make me smile..................

All they amount to is

(a) I like Froch, i knew he was better than Groves, he won and i think its brilliant, you Groves fans no nothing.

Or

(B) I like Groves, Froch was losing and only won by a million to one shot, you Froch fans no nothing.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz lol

No-one ever say's it like it is. Eighteen pages of virtual crap :-)

Then say it like it is Quiz

stujones wrote:Autobarn,

My thing is not about not giving Froch credit, it is the loving in that Sky is giving Froch throughout the fight and post fight and what we will get for the next few months.

However, if you look back to this forum 6 months ago, there were posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due. So maybe Sky/Watt etc are over compensating for it.

It was an evenly matched contest up until the KO. Groves is still largely unproven at world level (Froch's words).

No offense Stu but did you miss the very biased pro Groves commentary in the first fight, particularily from Watt? Yes Groves was schooling Froch in the first fight but they completely ignored everything that Carl did land.

palooka wrote:Then say it like it is Quiz

I used to come on these pages all the time Palooka and for some years. I used to get into argumentative spats with people, write long essays clarifying my points and trying to win futile debates about fighters. In the end people will never change their minds or if they do, they certainly wouldn't admit it to you whist a debate or slanging match was in full swing. I very occasionally read these pages now and don't post anymore. I posted after the Mayweather fight and i am doing some reading now after the Froch - Groves fight. When you have been off the site for a long time and come back, you can see all the petty squabbles haven't changed and it makes you smile :-) I would give my opinion, but it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. Boxing is tribal and people stick with whoever they like best and justify or quantify performances on the back of that.

columbo wrote:

stujones wrote:Autobarn,

My thing is not about not giving Froch credit, it is the loving in that Sky is giving Froch throughout the fight and post fight and what we will get for the next few months.

However, if you look back to this forum 6 months ago, there were posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due. So maybe Sky/Watt etc are over compensating for it.

It was an evenly matched contest up until the KO. Groves is still largely unproven at world level (Froch's words).

No offense Stu but did you miss the very biased pro Groves commentary in the first fight, particularily from Watt? Yes Groves was schooling Froch in the first fight but they completely ignored everything that Carl did land.

What happened in the Kevin Mitchell fight mate I missed it, did he get knocked out?

Definately a lack of appreciation in the stadium. I winced plenty at some of the comments and constant booing. Even khan got booed on the big screen. Very sad or jealous or both folks out there..

n1ebf wrote:

columbo wrote:

stujones wrote:Autobarn,

My thing is not about not giving Froch credit, it is the loving in that Sky is giving Froch throughout the fight and post fight and what we will get for the next few months.

However, if you look back to this forum 6 months ago, there were posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due. So maybe Sky/Watt etc are over compensating for it.

It was an evenly matched contest up until the KO. Groves is still largely unproven at world level (Froch's words).

No offense Stu but did you miss the very biased pro Groves commentary in the first fight, particularily from Watt? Yes Groves was schooling Froch in the first fight but they completely ignored everything that Carl did land.

What happened in the Kevin Mitchell fight mate I missed it, did he get knocked out?

Your humour is terrible. You should work on that

95gerog wrote:Definately a lack of appreciation in the stadium. I winced plenty at some of the comments and constant booing. Even khan got booed on the big screen. Very sad or jealous or both folks out there..

The atmosphere for the main event was quality. There was a lot of empty seats though.

Quix wrote:

palooka wrote:Then say it like it is Quiz

I used to come on these pages all the time Palooka and for some years. I used to get into argumentative spats with people, write long essays clarifying my points and trying to win futile debates about fighters. In the end people will never change their minds or if they do, they certainly wouldn't admit it to you whist a debate or slanging match was in full swing. I very occasionally read these pages now and don't post anymore. I posted after the Mayweather fight and i am doing some reading now after the Froch - Groves fight. When you have been off the site for a long time and come back, you can see all the petty squabbles haven't changed and it makes you smile :-) I would give my opinion, but it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. Boxing is tribal and people stick with whoever they like best and justify or quantify performances on the back of that.

I remember you, didn't you post as Quixall?

It's a shame that you don't enjoy posting as much and I can say honestly that I've had my view changed by many different people on here. I agree that there is tribalism involved with the sport and for the most part a lot of posters say things tongue in cheek. There are far more decent posters on here than twats or trolls. I've done essay long posts with arguments as well and sometimes been right and sometimes wrong.

Take it easy and hope you decide to post some more, there are some really funny threads and posts - it's not all about teaching or civilising people

Final round wrote:

SNG wrote:

Final round wrote:Froch should retire. He's never going to top an event like that.

I agree to an extent but if there's fights he wants (Vegas) why not have a swan song? I would love to see him fight Degale but that isn't happening in Vegas, and I don't think the Chavez Jr fight will be as big as a Degale fight here, but who knows? I think he has one or two left in him. Chavez Jr, then Degale and then a final crack at Ward?

Yeah the Vegas dream doesn't seem so large after tonight and versus DeGale would fill Wembley again but Carl is a very rich man with a family, set up for life but would like to see him walk away on top with faculty's intact

I'm not sure a fight with Degale will fill Wembley again - this event was a one off helped by a nasty build-up & controversial ending to the first fight. If Carl does fight on he'll opt for the Vegas payday & then retire methinks.

mimmy123 wrote:i told you lot all along that Groves would not beat Froch, never could never would. Froch is in a different class. You all made assumptions after Groves got lucky in his last fight. Class always comes out in the end.

Who is us lot? I predicted a Groves win as well.

I'm feeling it a bit after last night.

Hoping to pop down the pub still for England vs Babarians, though knackered. Hair of dog, and all that.

palooka wrote:

Quix wrote:

palooka wrote:Then say it like it is Quiz

I used to come on these pages all the time Palooka and for some years. I used to get into argumentative spats with people, write long essays clarifying my points and trying to win futile debates about fighters. In the end people will never change their minds or if they do, they certainly wouldn't admit it to you whist a debate or slanging match was in full swing. I very occasionally read these pages now and don't post anymore. I posted after the Mayweather fight and i am doing some reading now after the Froch - Groves fight. When you have been off the site for a long time and come back, you can see all the petty squabbles haven't changed and it makes you smile :-) I would give my opinion, but it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference. Boxing is tribal and people stick with whoever they like best and justify or quantify performances on the back of that.

I remember you, didn't you post as Quixall?

It's a shame that you don't enjoy posting as much and I can say honestly that I've had my view changed by many different people on here. I agree that there is tribalism involved with the sport and for the most part a lot of posters say things tongue in cheek. There are far more decent posters on here than twats or trolls. I've done essay long posts with arguments as well and sometimes been right and sometimes wrong.

Take it easy and hope you decide to post some more, there are some really funny threads and posts - it's not all about teaching or civilising people

Yes mate, i am Quixall..................as in "i am Spartacus" lol :-)

I may do more posts. I enjoy the pages after the big fights as it's interesting to see which way people view a fight. I notice that Jim Watt is getting a kicking lol. Are some of the old faces still around ? I haven't been a regular poster for about four years or so, maybe even longer. How are you doing ? From what i can remember, i think you were always a moderating voice Palooka, one of the sensible guys who preffered a " straightner " to bringing a chainsaw to any debate :-)

Just watched the fight, I thought Groves was a bit slow out of the blocks, maybe behind all the bravado the occasion got to him a bit.
He should of been busier and paid the price for waiting to long, he seemed to think the same Carl Froch from the 1st fight would turn up again, and when Carl boxed more George didn't seem comfortable.

I'm fine thank you, I used to post as simon fox.

There are plenty of long time posters who have stayed and some have changed their usernames. I still really enjoy the interaction and banter. I am more conciliatory than others but I'm like that in real life as well, I do admire some of the more nutty ones though, I imagine they're nothing like as mental in the day time.

British and Irish is my favourite, the CS is a bit crazy and OT is good as well. I think a load will be pleased to see you're still around, the really old timers moan that the best posters have gone because of the antics of some of the newer ones.

Take it easy Quix

columbo wrote:

stujones wrote:Autobarn,

My thing is not about not giving Froch credit, it is the loving in that Sky is giving Froch throughout the fight and post fight and what we will get for the next few months.

However, if you look back to this forum 6 months ago, there were posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due. So maybe Sky/Watt etc are over compensating for it.

It was an evenly matched contest up until the KO. Groves is still largely unproven at world level (Froch's words).

No offense Stu but did you miss the very biased pro Groves commentary in the first fight, particularily from Watt? Yes Groves was schooling Froch in the first fight but they completely ignored everything that Carl did land.

Columbo - I said that in my post - "posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due".

What doesn't make good TV is the basic Froch loving in for 6 months like we had after Kessler 2 and Bute - and I suspect we will have that also.

For me, that was not really the performance of someone who is in the P4P top ten bracket as some people have him.

palooka wrote:British and Irish is my favourite, the CS is a bit crazy and OT is good as well. I think a load will be pleased to see you're still around, the really old timers moan that the best posters have gone because of the antics of some of the newer ones.

Had to laugh at one guy behind me, he spent the previous hour or so chipping on about how calzaghe could never beat froch and as the fight ended went "see that's what would have happened to him" as if that somehow proved his point that froch is fistic kryptonite to boxers with speed.

stujones wrote:

columbo wrote:

stujones wrote:Autobarn,

My thing is not about not giving Froch credit, it is the loving in that Sky is giving Froch throughout the fight and post fight and what we will get for the next few months.

However, if you look back to this forum 6 months ago, there were posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due. So maybe Sky/Watt etc are over compensating for it.

It was an evenly matched contest up until the KO. Groves is still largely unproven at world level (Froch's words).

No offense Stu but did you miss the very biased pro Groves commentary in the first fight, particularily from Watt? Yes Groves was schooling Froch in the first fight but they completely ignored everything that Carl did land.

Columbo - I said that in my post - "posters claiming that Sky were not giving Froch his due".

What doesn't make good TV is the basic Froch loving in for 6 months like we had after Kessler 2 and Bute - and I suspect we will have that also.

For me, that was not really the performance of someone who is in the P4P top ten bracket as some people have him.

Alright, fair enough mate. Good point.

orbtastic wrote:Had to laugh at one guy behind me, he spent the previous hour or so chipping on about how calzaghe could never beat froch and as the fight ended went "see that's what would have happened to him" as if that somehow proved his point that froch is fistic kryptonite to boxers with speed.

I always end up sat in front of people like that on North End games, who clearly don't have a fornicating clue what they're talking about, end up having to move, winds me up big time.