BoxRec

brian13 wrote:

palooka wrote:I hope Froch gets his big bout in Vegas or San Antonio v Chavez Jnr - it'd be a pretty good scrap and would draw a big big crowd if they were clever with the dates (which they are).

Why on earth would Froch go to Texas, it is just as bad as Germany.

Because they'd get nearly as many in as at Wembley, it was only a thought and Vegas has it's moments with the scorecards.

Froch can fight whoever he wants as he is an international superstar,, ha ha ha

Groves is still talking shit about dominating Froch so Froch should just rip it into him about his glass jaw

I think george is now damaged goods and is a hype job formed by sky again...

He was in a very good fight with degale and got the nod because of his corner mans tactics which he does not have anymore

never beat anybody else apart from that near frcohs level

palooka wrote:I hope Froch gets his big bout in Vegas or San Antonio v Chavez Jnr - it'd be a pretty good scrap and would draw a big big crowd if they were clever with the dates (which they are).

There's not a lot of point in fighting Kessler again - it's just going over old ground, the first 2 fights were very good but there's just no need.

I hope Groves has a break and comes back against a top 15 boxer, I don't think he needs to change trainer etc, he did well v Froch first bout and OK 2nd and got sparked - it happens.

Groves definitely needs to change trainer. The Behind The Ropes programmes basically showed him training himself with Paddy holding the pads every now and again. With Booth in the corner he would have had a much better chance of winning both fights.... Booth alluded to the fact that he can get complacent in a post-fight interview.

Froch is in a tough place actually, I think a 5am Vegas fight against Kessler or JCC is a hard sell in the UK on PPV - I certainly wouldn't be getting up at that time and spending £16 on it. GGG I'd have a little more interest in but with his power and Froch's defence I think that's a bad fight to take. DeGale is an interesting fight, but it's a massive come-down from 80,000 at Wembley, coupled with the fact that DeGale has a style that can make anyone look bad.

Froch wouldnt fight in San Antonio. He wants the Vegas fight for the prestige that comes with fighting in Vegas. Dont think it's really about the money for him.

Happy Slapper wrote:

palooka wrote:I hope Froch gets his big bout in Vegas or San Antonio v Chavez Jnr - it'd be a pretty good scrap and would draw a big big crowd if they were clever with the dates (which they are).

There's not a lot of point in fighting Kessler again - it's just going over old ground, the first 2 fights were very good but there's just no need.

I hope Groves has a break and comes back against a top 15 boxer, I don't think he needs to change trainer etc, he did well v Froch first bout and OK 2nd and got sparked - it happens.

Groves definitely needs to change trainer. The Behind The Ropes programmes basically showed him training himself with Paddy holding the pads every now and again. With Booth in the corner he would have had a much better chance of winning both fights.... Booth alluded to the fact that he can get complacent in a post-fight interview.


The Behind The Ropes programmes also showed McCracken holding the pads for Froch and it seems Robert was doing a lot of the work - it shows that an awful lot of the serious training wasn't filmed. I don't think there was a great deal wrong with the tactics in the 2nd bout; Groves knew that Froch was highly likely to be in the fight till the last bell and pressing hard. He had to find a way of competing and saving strength, energy and power for late on. He caught a big shot flush by a very strong, powerful and determined fellow. That has happened to boxers throughout history and happens regardless of who is sat giving instructions. The greatest tactical minds in boxing have been beaten by a single well timed punch.

Happy slapper,

I don't think Groves fought like had had cut corners in his camp. Yes, the pace was a fair amount slower than for fight 1, but Groves wasn't looking fatigue unlike in fight 1. Indeed, up until the point of the conclusive KO it looked like Groves was pacing himself better than for fight 1.

I came within a few seconds of stating on the round by round thread.... well fight two is going to last longer than fight 1. In fight 1 he seemed to be getting weaker as the rounds went by, for fight 2 he was seemingly getting stronger.... then boom.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:

palooka wrote:I hope Froch gets his big bout in Vegas or San Antonio v Chavez Jnr - it'd be a pretty good scrap and would draw a big big crowd if they were clever with the dates (which they are).

There's not a lot of point in fighting Kessler again - it's just going over old ground, the first 2 fights were very good but there's just no need.

I hope Groves has a break and comes back against a top 15 boxer, I don't think he needs to change trainer etc, he did well v Froch first bout and OK 2nd and got sparked - it happens.

Groves definitely needs to change trainer. The Behind The Ropes programmes basically showed him training himself with Paddy holding the pads every now and again. With Booth in the corner he would have had a much better chance of winning both fights.... Booth alluded to the fact that he can get complacent in a post-fight interview.

Froch is in a tough place actually, I think a 5am Vegas fight against Kessler or JCC is a hard sell in the UK on PPV - I certainly wouldn't be getting up at that time and spending £16 on it. GGG I'd have a little more interest in but with his power and Froch's defence I think that's a bad fight to take. DeGale is an interesting fight, but it's a massive come-down from 80,000 at Wembley, coupled with the fact that DeGale has a style that can make anyone look bad.

I agree with Happy Slapper. Keep Paddy as a #2, but bring someone in who actually has experience. He would have won fight one with Booth in his corner IMO.

There's no way Froch will travel to Texas unless the money is ridiculous.

What about Billy? They could share hats.

Sklar wrote: What about Billy? They could share hats.

It's me, Billy.

I had to Google that.

stujones wrote:Happy slapper,

I don't think Groves fought like had had cut corners in his camp. Yes, the pace was a fair amount slower than for fight 1, but Groves wasn't looking fatigue unlike in fight 1. Indeed, up until the point of the conclusive KO it looked like Groves was pacing himself better than for fight 1.

I came within a few seconds of stating on the round by round thread.... well fight two is going to last longer than fight 1. In fight 1 he seemed to be getting weaker as the rounds went by, for fight 2 he was seemingly getting stronger.... then boom.

I don't agree. Half the reason he looked like he had more in the tank second time around was because he hadn't thrown anything of any note all night long. You can't move around throwing single jabs at Froch all night. Froch looked scared to attack him in the first fight and at the start of the second fight, and that was all because he knew Groves could hit him hard, and accurately with the right hand. Once he realised Groves wasn't really throwing it all that much second time around he knew he could unload. To be beat Froch he had to back him up - at no point in the second fight did he really try to take centre of the ring and do that. It was a matter of time before he got nailed.

columbo wrote:Froch wouldnt fight in San Antonio. He wants the Vegas fight for the prestige that comes with fighting in Vegas. Dont think it's really about the money for him.

But Chavez would probably prefer to fight in Texas, the drug testing seems to be a bit slack there, bigger crowd and he has all the advantages there. If Chavez won't fight in Vegas, he's a bit short on options, Ward isn't a big enough name, he doesn't seem to fancy Golovkin and a Kessler fight in Vegas would be difficult to sell.

Happy Slapper wrote:

palooka wrote:I hope Froch gets his big bout in Vegas or San Antonio v Chavez Jnr - it'd be a pretty good scrap and would draw a big big crowd if they were clever with the dates (which they are).

There's not a lot of point in fighting Kessler again - it's just going over old ground, the first 2 fights were very good but there's just no need.

I hope Groves has a break and comes back against a top 15 boxer, I don't think he needs to change trainer etc, he did well v Froch first bout and OK 2nd and got sparked - it happens.

Groves definitely needs to change trainer. The Behind The Ropes programmes basically showed him training himself with Paddy holding the pads every now and again. With Booth in the corner he would have had a much better chance of winning both fights.... Booth alluded to the fact that he can get complacent in a post-fight interview.

Froch is in a tough place actually, I think a 5am Vegas fight against Kessler or JCC is a hard sell in the UK on PPV - I certainly wouldn't be getting up at that time and spending £16 on it. GGG I'd have a little more interest in but with his power and Froch's defence I think that's a bad fight to take. DeGale is an interesting fight, but it's a massive come-down from 80,000 at Wembley, coupled with the fact that DeGale has a style that can make anyone look bad.

I read somewhere the other day that Amsterdam may be an option for a Froch-Kessler III. That's what Ron Lewis said in the paper on Saturday, prior to the fight - if Froch won it. It's not Vegas but it would suit a UK (& Danish) audience perfectly. Only thing is I'm not sure everyone isn't a bit Froch-Kesslered out . Does the Dane bring a lot to the table of late?
I'm sure I read that Degale's fighter was an IBF eliminator and that he is now mandatory - can someone please confirm that if Froch decides not to fight Degale, does he have to give up the IBF belt or be stripped? (like McDonnell was).

Could Froch v Kessler attract the same crowd I'd love to see a 3 rd fight

Eddie Hearn was in yesterdays Guardian saying that the belts were no longer of massive importance and that Froch would have a rest and decide with Rob McCracken what to do next; I don't think the IBF will be able to 'bully' him.

palooka wrote:Eddie Hearn was in yesterdays Guardian saying that the belts were no longer of massive importance and that Froch would have a rest and decide with Rob McCracken what to do next; I don't think the IBF will be able to 'bully' him.

maybe not bully him, but they can take it off him, if it's been recently applied to fighter from up the road from him they have to be consistent don't they......oh - that's right - this is boxing we're talking about - all they need to do is tell 'Chunky' that his eliminator wasn't a final, final eliminator and bestow something upon containing the word silver or interim. (In any case, Froch would still hold the WBA.)

I thought Froch had already fulfilled his IBF mandatory fighting Groves, so he can fight who he wants next time out then has to sort something out with Degale (the new IBF mandatory challenger) or vacate. I would imagine Froch probably wants to hold on to the IBF without fighting Degale right away, but I think Eddie would rather he vacate it and let Degale fight for a vacant title. Froch really doesn't need titles to sell fights but Degale could use a belt to help establish himself as a major player.

Hearn says 120 days Froch must fight DeGale.... that aint happening, so I think.... Froch vs Chavez for just the WBA title (if somehow Suliman Jnr can strip Bika for their darling then they will also). DeGale will fight for the vacant IBF title.... then (if persuaded) Froch vs DeGale in a unification.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:The rematch was mandated by the IBF, but it wasn’t seen as a mandatory defence by the organisation, it was a chance to clear up the leftovers from the first fight.

This

Viktor Vaughn wrote:The rematch was mandated by the IBF, but it wasn’t seen as a mandatory defence by the organisation, it was a chance to clear up the leftovers from the first fight.

well what a load of bollocks that is if true. Mandated but not Mandatory? Does that even make sense? Given the outcome of the second fight you'd think they'd give Carl a bit of free reign now he has fulfilled his 'mandated' but not 'mandatory' obligations.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:

domjon wrote:

Viktor Vaughn wrote:The rematch was mandated by the IBF, but it wasn’t seen as a mandatory defence by the organisation, it was a chance to clear up the leftovers from the first fight.

well what a load of bollocks that is if true. Mandated but not Mandatory? Does that even make sense? Given the outcome of the second fight you'd think they'd give Carl a bit of free reign now he has fulfilled his 'mandated' but not 'mandatory' obligations.

It is true, and it isn't bollocks. It was mandated as in being an order by the IBF to defend it again against Groves due to the exceptional circumstances. It had all the same criteria, potential purse split etc., but was seen as extension of fight one, which was the mandatory proper.

well it sounds like bollocks to me, I must have missed the first fight being declared a NC.

Viktor Vaughn wrote:

domjon wrote:
well it sounds like bollocks to me, I must have missed the first fight being declared a NC.

I don’t care what it sounds like, it’s how things were worked out by the IBF. It’s hardly a state secret.

cool your boots I aint doubting it's true just saying I think it's a pretty poor ruling.

seems pretty unfair to me. Would perhaps be logical if they had declared the first fight a NC, not that I'd have agreed with that.

I think it could prove quite important...Froch's negotiating power with only a regular belt in hand is surely going to be diminished in what are already likely to be tough negotiations with HBO

Could they whack a WBC interim belt on it? Harsh on Bika but this is Chavez and the WBC we are talking about.

I think Eddie WANTS the IBF belt around DeGale as soon as possible. As Kalle Saurland said - got to have a plan B, and Eddie has got to be planning for life without Froch.

DeGale needs that belt to be a draw.

If the IBF mandatory challenger gives up his shot what happens then? Do they just keep moving down the list until someone takes the fight or would that be a way for the champion to buy a bit of grace?

If Eddie could get Degale a voluntary shot at Bika's belt and Froch took his IBF to vegas surely pretty much everybody would be happy?

Viktor Vaughn wrote:

domjon wrote:

Viktor Vaughn wrote:The rematch was mandated by the IBF, but it wasn’t seen as a mandatory defence by the organisation, it was a chance to clear up the leftovers from the first fight.

well what a load of bollocks that is if true. Mandated but not Mandatory? Does that even make sense? Given the outcome of the second fight you'd think they'd give Carl a bit of free reign now he has fulfilled his 'mandated' but not 'mandatory' obligations.

It is true, and it isn't bollocks. It was mandated as in being an order by the IBF to defend it again against Groves due to the exceptional circumstances. It had all the same criteria, potential purse split etc., but was seen as extension of fight one, which was the mandatory proper.