Page 1 of 2

Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 19:55
by Craig14
In world title wins by a brit?

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 19:58
by stujones
I would say higher than Lacy vs Calzaghe (based on Bute being more proven than Lacy).... lower than Hatton vs Tszyu.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 19:59
by Dioufy
Best I have ever seen from a British fight, bar maybe Hatton/Tyszu.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:00
by Craig14
And lower than Honeyghan-Curry. But still it's got to be there or there abouts.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:16
by bigped
was it that froch was really good? or that bute was just pretty hyped and bad??

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:26
by Horse
bigped wrote:was it that froch was really good? or that bute was just pretty hyped and bad??
Bute has plenty of good wins and is a proven world class fighter. It was Froch being very good.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:26
by dbf
Great win - it was the unexpected dominance that surely puts quite high on modern lists. Was Mormeck better than Bute? Think so. But Haye had to do it the hard way, Froch made this look easy.

So happy for Carl he deserved a good win on a major TV station at home.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:27
by Hagler2002
Bute was a hype job, nothing on his CV to suggest he was at world level and he gave the Super 6 a wide berth.

Froch's win was a good one but no better imo than his stoppage of Jermain Taylor.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:28
by stujones
bigped wrote:was it that froch was really good? or that bute was just pretty hyped and bad??
I don't think we can say Bute was just pretty hyped. Okay, so he hasn't fought the likes of Ward or Dirrell - but he has beaten some decent top tenners and done it well. His form against common opponents was better than Froch's.

However, I thought when they were showing clips of him on ringside doing some pad work and he looked really bad, no defence and look sluggish. Was this one fight too many at Super Middle for Lucian? Was there problems in his camp?

Lucian was bad, but I think his previous form highlights he is not just hype over substance - there was some substance there.

Froch was also really good.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:30
by NazNaci1
Great win for Carl. Fantastic performance.

I'd place that win pretty much higher than anything Calzaghe did, but not at the level of, say Honeyghan. Still, a great night for British boxing.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:31
by Horse
dbf wrote:Great win - it was the unexpected dominance that surely puts quite high on modern lists. Was Mormeck better than Bute? Think so. But Haye had to do it the hard way, Froch made this look easy.

So happy for Carl he deserved a good win on a major TV station at home.
I would say that Bute is better than Mormeck.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:33
by Hagler2002
The Dark Destroyer wrote:
Hagler2002 wrote:Bute was a hype job, nothing on his CV to suggest he was at world level and he gave the Super 6 a wide berth.

Froch's win was a good one but no better imo than his stoppage of Jermain Taylor.
Well, he was behind on the cards against Taylor, a fight which Taylor looked good in. In this he was dominant from almost the first second. A much better win.
Taylor was shot, Bute was a hype job, my point is Froch's win tonight was his best followed closely by stopping Taylor not the manner in how he did it.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:34
by Horse
Hagler2002 wrote:Bute was a hype job, nothing on his CV to suggest he was at world level and he gave the Super 6 a wide berth.

Froch's win was a good one but no better imo than his stoppage of Jermain Taylor.
Bute has wins against Johnson, Andrade, Bika & Miranda. His C.V. clearly showed he was at world level.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:35
by yiddo14
Calzaghe would have smashed Bute too probably but he didn't. Bute was Froch's Ottke if you like!

Froch has a better record than Joe. Doesn't mean he would have bested the Welshman though in a fight but it would have been a humdinger that's for sure!

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:36
by Hagler2002
bengulnaci1 wrote:Great win for Carl. Fantastic performance.

I'd place that win pretty much higher than anything Calzaghe did
Without doubt that is the stupidest thing I've heard tonight.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:37
by jameswilson
stujones wrote:
bigped wrote:was it that froch was really good? or that bute was just pretty hyped and bad??
I don't think we can say Bute was just pretty hyped. Okay, so he hasn't fought the likes of Ward or Dirrell - but he has beaten some decent top tenners and done it well. His form against common opponents was better than Froch's.

However, I thought when they were showing clips of him on ringside doing some pad work and he looked really bad, no defence and look sluggish. Was this one fight too many at Super Middle for Lucian? Was there problems in his camp?

Lucian was bad, but I think his previous form highlights he is not just hype over substance - there was some substance there.

Froch was also really good.
Bute I think was over-rated to a point in a similar way that Lacy proved to be. Bute may not go on the bad run Lacy did, but I rank Froch's win as equal to Calzaghe's domination of Lacy.

Bute's big victories were all over below par opposition and a lot was made about his body punching. Now how many real top class fighters at any weight do you see stopped by body shots? Hatton breaking Castillo's ribs is the only one that springs into my head. The fans made out like Bute was the best body puncher in history based on body punch stoppages of guys who most World class boxers would stop (with respect to some of them.)

It's an excellent win but there are better wins by British boxers, but no doubt I am buzzing like everyone else. :DDD

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:38
by jameswilson
The Dark Destroyer wrote:
yiddo14 wrote:Calzaghe would have smashed Bute too probably but he didn't. Bute was Froch's Ottke if you like!

Froch has a better record than Joe. Doesn't mean he would have bested the Welshman though in a fight but it would have been a humdinger that's for sure!
Lets see how Froch does if he ever ventures north of 168.
I really think if he makes weight as easily as is rumoured then if he should be moving in any direction it is down in weight. Froch said he struggled with Ward's size, well he shouldn't be stepping up to face bigger guys if that is the case, even if he could ppotentially win a World title there.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:39
by Datsue
Hagler2002 wrote:
The Dark Destroyer wrote:
Hagler2002 wrote:Bute was a hype job, nothing on his CV to suggest he was at world level and he gave the Super 6 a wide berth.

Froch's win was a good one but no better imo than his stoppage of Jermain Taylor.
Well, he was behind on the cards against Taylor, a fight which Taylor looked good in. In this he was dominant from almost the first second. A much better win.
Taylor was shot, Bute was a hype job, my point is Froch's win tonight was his best followed closely by stopping Taylor not the manner in how he did it.

I'd shy away from using phrases like hype job but yes Taylor=former undisputed middle champ, beat B. Hopkins.

Bute = beat Sakio Bika & Brian Magee.

So glad Froch smashed him to pieces & so glad I over-rated the Canadian but the "exuberance" button has been pressed, & people are getting silly.

You'll only be able to judge the magnitude of this win if Bute manages to come back & do soemthing in his career, 'cos for now Bute's a bloke who stepped up to genuine elite level & got massively exposed. Great performance from Frochy & I"m so pleased for him but I am not going to say stupid shit like "best British win ever" & "He's gonna do that to Kessler" because... He won't.

Whoever said Lacy=Bute was more on the mark.

Anyway, I don't care. I love you, Carl Froch.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:39
by NazNaci1
Hagler2002 wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Great win for Carl. Fantastic performance.

I'd place that win pretty much higher than anything Calzaghe did
Without doubt that is the stupidest thing I've heard tonight.
Well, that's your opinion and that's fine. However you post, regarding someone else's opinion reeks of stupidity, so if you disagree, then fine, you disagree.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:39
by Hagler2002
Horse wrote: Andrade, Bika & Miranda
Are you joking?

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:40
by Datsue
jameswilson wrote:
stujones wrote:
bigped wrote:was it that froch was really good? or that bute was just pretty hyped and bad??
I don't think we can say Bute was just pretty hyped. Okay, so he hasn't fought the likes of Ward or Dirrell - but he has beaten some decent top tenners and done it well. His form against common opponents was better than Froch's.

However, I thought when they were showing clips of him on ringside doing some pad work and he looked really bad, no defence and look sluggish. Was this one fight too many at Super Middle for Lucian? Was there problems in his camp?

Lucian was bad, but I think his previous form highlights he is not just hype over substance - there was some substance there.

Froch was also really good.
Bute I think was over-rated to a point in a similar way that Lacy proved to be. Bute may not go on the bad run Lacy did, but I rank Froch's win as equal to Calzaghe's domination of Lacy.

Bute's big victories were all over below par opposition and a lot was made about his body punching. Now how many real top class fighters at any weight do you see stopped by body shots? Hatton breaking Castillo's ribs is the only one that springs into my head. The fans made out like Bute was the best body puncher in history based on body punch stoppages of guys who most World class boxers would stop (with respect to some of them.)

It's an excellent win but there are better wins by British boxers, but no doubt I am buzzing like everyone else. :DDD
Yes, this, sorry, that was what I meant to post!

:TU:

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:44
by Horse
Hagler2002 wrote:
Horse wrote: Andrade, Bika & Miranda
Are you joking?
No. Why did you take Johnson's name out of my quote?

Bute was clearly a proven world class fighter with the wins he had.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:48
by Hagler2002
bengulnaci1 wrote:
Hagler2002 wrote:
bengulnaci1 wrote:Great win for Carl. Fantastic performance.

I'd place that win pretty much higher than anything Calzaghe did
Without doubt that is the stupidest thing I've heard tonight.
Well, that's your opinion and that's fine. However you post, regarding someone else's opinion reeks of stupidity, so if you disagree, then fine, you disagree.
Oh I wasn't aware that we all had to bow down to your opinion on a public forum, agree, not challenge it and take it as gospel!

I'd appreciate it if you could start off by telling us how Froch's win tonight was better than Calzaghe's dominant display against Kessler.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:52
by Horse
Hagler2002 wrote:Oh I wasn't aware that we all had to bow down to your opinion on a public forum, agree, not challenge it and take it as gospel!

I'd appreciate it if you could start off by telling us how Froch's win tonight was better than Calzaghe's dominant display against Kessler.
Calzaghe wasn't dominant against Kessler.

Re: Froch's win - How does that rate?

Posted: 26 May 2012, 20:55
by Hagler2002
Horse wrote:
Hagler2002 wrote:
Horse wrote: Andrade, Bika & Miranda
Are you joking?
No. Why did you take Johnson's name out of my quote?

Bute was clearly a proven world class fighter with the wins he had.
He was clearly a 'fringe' level world class fighter, that's why he wasn't in Super 6 and when giving the opportunity he choose not to become involved.

Do you think really think Andrade, Bika & Miranda are on the same level as Pascal, Taylor, Dirrel, Abraham & Ward?