BoxRec

G0mez wrote:He had 10 minutes to get his gloves and tape on and barely got a go on the pads before getting booed into the ring for the biggest fight of his career.

The fact he wasn't himself (and Taylor was) cost him 5 points on the cards.

The thing with Hopkins, is he had been elevated to god-status after his win over Pavlik - and you know what, fair bloody play to him too.

BUT

The reality is Pavlik was as flat as a pancake on the night, weight 169lb as opposed to 187lb in Hopkins.

The rumour is he was hanging out his arse in the week prior to the fight with 'flu but thought he'd have enough to beat Hopkins anyway.

He couldn't even double his jab and his strong fundamentals were nowhere to be seen.

Taking nowt from Bernie, but Kelly was as bad as Bernie was good that night.

Agreed on all counts.

I think Hopkins would beat Froch, but it would be a tough fight for both of them. Hopkins knows how to buy time when he's tired.

stevieb_8006 wrote:

tonyevs wrote:One thing you have to credit Hopkins with is knowing the type of guys he can safely beat .. sure he got it wrong against Calzaghe - but only just

I can`t believe some people on this thread coming out with lame excuses for Carl`s last performance or even saying he had the Taylor fight under control .. he was 14seconds from defeat

No, Hopkins schools Froch every day of the week, Froch is slow, has a terrible defence, average punch power and was put down in his last fight by a guy who couldn`t put welters or lt-middles away in recent years ... what has Hopkins got to fear in Froch?

But I think Froch should jump at the fight if its offered, it will be a good pay day. Froch won`t have the belt for long so best cash in asap.

i'd dispute the "average punch power" bit

Stamina got to Taylor as much as any punch off Froch .. and Pascal was never in any serious trouble either.
A big puncher at world level will be shaking people up in the early rounds as well as the later ones .. Carl did neither against each of these opponents

I cant wait to see a rib/eardrum injury free, well prepared relaxed Froch coming out to a crowd that cheers him to the rafters but doesnt put him under undue pressure so that he can perform without feeling that he has to get into a brawl to satisfy the fans.

I'm sure a Froch with no 'distractions' must be lb for lb number 1

Seriously @ Gomez, god knows what you'll come out with when he gets beat

As for this fight. I think even on the Calzaghe display Beranrd beats Froch.It says something when a 31 year old is slower than a 44 year old but that the reslity that will be facing Froch.

I reckon Bernard has an answer for anything that Froch has, especially the dragonpunch that he likes to throw. Who has Froch fought that would remotely prepare him for a fight against Hopkins. Bernard would land plenty on Froch and he was clearly hurt in the 3rd round - if not by the knockdown but by the right hand counter after attempting that ridicolous uppercut - this would be bad new for him I feel

I think he has above average power but certainly isnt the 'nuclear' power puncher that has been made out by the usual suspects. I think his chin might need to be reclassified as well

Froch hit Taylor with a beauty of a right hand in oemthing like round 9. A real lovely shot that he thre properly with full force and Taylor hardly blinked. It may have had cumulative daamge but a shot like that from a KO puncher should have made a more immediate impression

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Funnily enough I fancy Froch to beat Hopkins. I think the old man would struggle with the pace and strength of Carl. He'd have a bad time of it in the later rounds.

Pace ? Froch is as slow as a snail. Hopkins would destroy him ala Pavlik.

Hopkins is a master and knows too much for Froch..

Asterix wrote:

G0mez wrote:He had 10 minutes to get his gloves and tape on and barely got a go on the pads before getting booed into the ring for the biggest fight of his career.

The fact he wasn't himself (and Taylor was) cost him 5 points on the cards.

The thing with Hopkins, is he had been elevated to god-status after his win over Pavlik - and you know what, fair bloody play to him too.

BUT

The reality is Pavlik was as flat as a pancake on the night, weight 169lb as opposed to 187lb in Hopkins.

The rumour is he was hanging out his arse in the week prior to the fight with 'flu but thought he'd have enough to beat Hopkins anyway.

He couldn't even double his jab and his strong fundamentals were nowhere to be seen.

Taking nowt from Bernie, but Kelly was as bad as Bernie was good that night.

Agreed on all counts.

I think Hopkins would beat Froch, but it would be a tough fight for both of them. Hopkins knows how to buy time when he's tired.

hopkins certainly knows too much for froch, who has just come to world class

however all hopkins' recent success came against soft guys that moved up to light heavy,. light heavy being the most comfortable weight for him at 44 yo.

i always felt that if he carried on making 160, that taylor would beat him again, that wright would beat him, and that - yes - even pavlik would beat an old hopkins straining down to 160.

so now hopkins is willing to make 168? no doubt he can do it but at what cost? it will take something out of the old man. being away from home will also take something. it would be interesting what happens if froch makes 2 concessions, when he normally never makes any concessions.

he must think that froch can sell out a massive arena and that they will want to give him huge money and take little themselves. i don't think it'd happen, the fight.

i think froch needs a couple of settling down fights. where he applies some of the stuff he's been taught. i want to see double jabs, hands back in guard position, hitting the body, coming up to the head, breaking guys down bit by bit and then going for the finish

sg1985 wrote:

Autobarn wrote: i think froch needs a couple of settling down fights. where he applies some of the stuff he's been taught. i want to see double jabs, hands back in guard position, hitting the body, coming up to the head, breaking guys down bit by bit and then going for the finish

you insult calzaghe for fighting questionable opponents and now you want froch to do the exact same thing?

Even more worrying is the call for Froch to actually duck Hopkins.

I really don't think a 'couple of settling down fights' are going to change Froch at this point. He is what he is.

Froch could do with plenty of sparring against Hopkins, not fight him. Lots of tough rounds with B-Hop in the gym will make him a much better fighter, whereas fighting him means a potential loss on his record. Whatever you say about Hopkins picking opponents he knows he can beat, there's no doubting his level of experience and competition would be the advantage against someone who was losing right until the dying seconds of the fight against another top-level operator in Jermain Taylor.

I'm not sure I'd be completely safe with a bet for a win over Kessler either.

sg1985 wrote:

Autobarn wrote: i think froch needs a couple of settling down fights. where he applies some of the stuff he's been taught. i want to see double jabs, hands back in guard position, hitting the body, coming up to the head, breaking guys down bit by bit and then going for the finish

you insult calzaghe for fighting questionable opponents and now you want froch to do the exact same thing?

Yes because those are the biggest names on Joe's record and he barely squeeked past them. The same Joe lauded by a lot of the Froch critics as a great fighter and in some cases even the greatest ever British fighter.

If Froch fights and beats both Hopkins and Kessler, clearly he is at least as good as Joe - but with the Taylor win would have a strong case for being even better.

sendo wrote: If Froch fights and beats both Hopkins and Kessler, clearly he is at least as good as Joe - but with the Taylor win would have a strong case for being even better.

That's a fairly large 'if' at this point. And I think you're overplaying the Taylor win somewhat.

Fact is, Froch has just had a terrific win, and yes, his attitude is miles better than Calzaghe's WBO mindset. But can we possibly ignore the retired Calzaghe, and let Froch get on with his career without referring to Joe every 5 minutes?

fist wrote:

sg1985 wrote:

Autobarn wrote: i think froch needs a couple of settling down fights. where he applies some of the stuff he's been taught. i want to see double jabs, hands back in guard position, hitting the body, coming up to the head, breaking guys down bit by bit and then going for the finish

you insult calzaghe for fighting questionable opponents and now you want froch to do the exact same thing?

Even more worrying is the call for Froch to actually duck Hopkins.

ludicrous.

joe had 8 years to grow into his title

every title reign is about planning so a fighter can have a career

no point deliberately going for the worst fight

states wrote:I really don't think a 'couple of settling down fights' are going to change Froch at this point. He is what he is.

look at adamek

current ring chmp at cruiser, excellent slugger

3 of his first 4 title fights, he took some of the sickest sustained punishment i've ever seen

when he won the WBC 175 belt, he was in hospital for a full wek or 2 after

he was standing right in front of power punchers FFS and getting mashed up

adamek changed. froch can.

states wrote:

sendo wrote: If Froch fights and beats both Hopkins and Kessler, clearly he is at least as good as Joe - but with the Taylor win would have a strong case for being even better.

That's a fairly large 'if' at this point. And I think you're overplaying the Taylor win somewhat.

Fact is, Froch has just had a terrific win, and yes, his attitude is miles better than Calzaghe's WBO mindset. But can we possibly ignore the retired Calzaghe, and let Froch get on with his career without referring to Joe every 5 minutes?

cazlaghe and froch are dividing the fans big time

if benn and eubank were around fighting in internet era, the message boards would look something like this

it would make a great grudge match

these 2 fighters are just about the opposite in every way - personality, attitude, style of fighting, punch deilivery

you can't like both, it has to be either one or t'other

this is why i've been stirring you buggers up, to make this point

talk about joe, and it comes back to froch
talk about froch and it comes back to joe

every time

Autobarn wrote:

states wrote:I really don't think a 'couple of settling down fights' are going to change Froch at this point. He is what he is.

lok at adamek

current ring chmp at cruiser, excellent slugger

3 of his first 4 title fights, he took some of the sickest sustained punishment i've ever seen

when he won the WBC 175 belt, he was in hospital for a full wek or 2 after

he was standing right in front of power punchers

adamek changed. froch can.

I don't think Adamek has changed one bit, he's still fights the same way he did against Paul Briggs. It's just that in his last fight his opponant wasn't the type of guy who was prepared to stand and trade shots with him, so he didn't have to take as much punishment.

Froch isn't gonna change. His confidence might grow, but he's always gonna struggle with the speed of opponants at world level and that's always going to make him look slightly amateurish at times.

Its astonishing that some of his fans are actually calling for him to duck Hopkins! He's the world champion; to say that because someone has the style or abilities to beat him so he should avoid that fighter makes an absolute mockery of being world champ. Im sure Froch would disagree with you, as he is a brave fighter, who beleives he is the best. Truth is, Hopkins does probably beat Froch because he is faster, more accurate, a spoiler and more importantly a much better boxer, the name of the game. And thats coming from someone who thinks Hopkins is overrated.

Froch does have a chance, a punchers chance and plenty of heart. Though Hopkins has a great chin and a good track record of staying on his feet. But still, Froch would be a major underdog.

If your going to ask your fighter to duck another boxer, then come out and admit it, and admit that its because he has a slim chance of winning. And also stop the subjective bollox about Calzaghe ducking opponents, particularly when in the context of Hopkins, the latter dropped out of a fight years ago until the risk reward ratio was good enough, with a number of losses under his belt and nothing to lose as an old man fighting an undefeated and previously undisputed SMW champ of the world.

Autobarn wrote:

states wrote:

sendo wrote: If Froch fights and beats both Hopkins and Kessler, clearly he is at least as good as Joe - but with the Taylor win would have a strong case for being even better.

That's a fairly large 'if' at this point. And I think you're overplaying the Taylor win somewhat.

Fact is, Froch has just had a terrific win, and yes, his attitude is miles better than Calzaghe's WBO mindset. But can we possibly ignore the retired Calzaghe, and let Froch get on with his career without referring to Joe every 5 minutes?

cazlaghe and froch are dividing the fans big time

if benn and eubank were around fighting in internet era, the message boards would look something like this

it would make a great grudge match

these 2 fighters are just about the opposite in every way - personality, attitude, style of fighting, punch deilivery

you can't like both, it has to be either one or t'other

this is why i've been stirring you buggers up, to make this point

talk about joe, and it comes back to froch
talk about froch and it comes back to joe

every time

well duh, 'barn, Eubank hadn't retired when Benn was at his peak
Benn hadn't retired when Eubank was at his peak
when benn was world champion Eubank wasn't 3 levels below him and making his way through british/euro levels
when Eubank was world champion benn wasn't 3 levels below him and making his way through british/euro levels

benn vs eubank was an eminently makeable fight

froch Calzaghe isn't, never has been.

Calzaghe v Froch wouldn't be as big as Benn v Eubank.

1. Benn and Eubank were in their prime, Froch apparently will get better, Joe is 37 so neither is in their prime.

2. Benn and Eubank had outrageous personalities, Calzaghe and Froch don't know what personalities are.

3. Benn and Eubank genuinely hated each other, Calzaghe and Froch just dislike one and other.

It would be a good fight no doubt about it, Joes speed will give Froch problems and Frochs power will always be there but Benn v Eubank it ain't.

Hopkins is so wrong for Froch.... It would probably be very one sided. I'd like Froch to beat him though.

banjo

The funny thing about this thread is that alot of the people who have praised Froch as the greatest s-middle - and ridicule Calzaghe for fighting Hopkins, now recognise that Hopkins easilly beats Froch

I know styles make fights etc .. but Calzaghe ability wise knew as much as Bernard and possesed the better engine .. maybe Hopkins knew one or two old pro tricks and had a bigger one punch dig .. but Calzaghes bigger and better engine just makes a win over froch even more obvious.

Froch reminds me of a Dennis Andries type world champion .. strong and determined, but lacking in all the finer points .. he`ll make exciting viewing for as long as he holds the title, which is no critism as a viewer.

well duh, 'barn, Eubank hadn't retired when Benn was at his peak
Benn hadn't retired when Eubank was at his peak
when benn was world champion Eubank wasn't 3 levels below him and making his way through british/euro levels
when Eubank was world champion benn wasn't 3 levels below him and making his way through british/euro levels

benn vs eubank was an eminently makeable fight

froch Calzaghe isn't, never has been.

you know what i mean cunter pouncher

i'm referring to the way these 2 are dividing fans

obviously eubank and benn were peers, whereas these 2 arrived at different times. but the proximity of joe leaving and carl arriving, does make it tantalising

one good thing about the death of big all british fights is that they are getting respect on the international scene

tonyevs wrote:The funny thing about this thread is that alot of the people who have praised Froch as the greatest s-middle - and ridicule Calzaghe for fighting Hopkins, now recognise that Hopkins easilly beats Froch

I know styles make fights etc .. but Calzaghe ability wise knew as much as Bernard and possesed the better engine .. maybe Hopkins knew one or two old pro tricks and had a bigger one punch dig .. but Calzaghes bigger and better engine just makes a win over froch even more obvious.

Froch reminds me of a Dennis Andries type world champion .. strong and determined, but lacking in all the finer points .. he`ll make exciting viewing for as long as he holds the title, which is no critism as a viewer.

different fighters match up differently. if froch is going to beat hopkins he has to find a style that will allow him to use his physical strengths on the older man. a culturally displaced, shrunken down hopkins won't have much in the way of workrate.

but calzaghe, is more aggressive, easier to hit clean, has been shaken by eubank, brewer, kessler, hurt to the body by RJJ, dropped by mitchell, RJJ, hopkins, salem, and pelted with right hands by woodhall and reid. why has no one followed up with a two fisted barrage? why no left hooks after the right hands that hurt joe? now obviously joe beating some of these guys shows class, but just about all were picked on at the right time.

at some point froch would nail him, and he would go in for the kill. no one, ever, has really

for any fighter, defending vs hopkins when you're fighting inexperienced is a preposterous career move. again, how many worruld title fights did joe have when he did it?

tonyevs wrote:The funny thing about this thread is that alot of the people who have praised Froch as the greatest s-middle - and ridicule Calzaghe for fighting Hopkins, now recognise that Hopkins easilly beats Froch

I know styles make fights etc .. but Calzaghe ability wise knew as much as Bernard and possesed the better engine .. maybe Hopkins knew one or two old pro tricks and had a bigger one punch dig .. but Calzaghes bigger and better engine just makes a win over froch even more obvious.

Froch reminds me of a Dennis Andries type world champion .. strong and determined, but lacking in all the finer points .. he`ll make exciting viewing for as long as he holds the title, which is no critism as a viewer.

Who here is praising Froch as the "Greatest Super Middle" exactly???

Come on, lets not try and spin things. As I said earlier, the reason why froch is well liked is because even though 99% of Boxing Fans would back Hopkins against him, Froch would still want the fight and give 100%. Thats the difference between him and Joe.
Joe only wnet after Hopkins once he had a huge win ratio in his favour and Hopkins had slost a bit. Froch will fight anybody, no matter how good they are. And all while he is a newly crowned Champ.
Who did Calzaghe fight in his first defence? Who was Calzaghe looking at in his 2nd defence? Was it Taylor and Hopkins....? Ah, didn't think so