BoxRec

Going into their first bout Groves was a clear underdog despite besting Degale in the 2006 ABAs. While I think that Degale edged their pro bout it was very close and I believe the decision is generally regarded as fair. Now it seems like they may fight a third time, and even though Groves won each of their bouts I think that he will probably be the underdog again given recent form.

Who do you think would win a rematch?

Groves has the blueprint to beat James, lets remember that. He can fight exactly the same way as before and probably nick a close fight. A lot of movement, drawing leads (degales poor finding jab) and then throwing hard counters and getting out of there. He can do this again but does he have the mentality to fight so disciplined again? I think he probably could have beaten Froch with this style but didn't want to do it.

His other option I think would be to stand and take centre ring and control James with his jab. Degale can't jab with groves.

crusader wrote:Going into their first bout Groves was a clear underdog despite besting Degale in the 2006 ABAs. While I think that Degale edged their pro bout it was very close and I believe the decision is generally regarded as fair. Now it seems like they may fight a third time, and even though Groves won each of their bouts I think that he will probably be the underdog again given recent form.

Who do you think would win a rematch?

Besting? Neither are travellers and neither quit...

TheLeprechaun wrote:Groves has the blueprint to beat James, lets remember that. He can fight exactly the same way as before and probably nick a close fight. A lot of movement, drawing leads (degales poor finding jab) and then throwing hard counters and getting out of there. He can do this again but does he have the mentality to fight so disciplined again? I think he probably could have beaten Froch with this style but didn't want to do it.

His other option I think would be to stand and take centre ring and control James with his jab. Degale can't jab with groves.

He tried to do that in the second fight but it didnt work.

I think maybe Groves is a fighter that's ups his game depending on the quality of his opposition so I wouldn't base my vote on last nights performances. I also think the way Groves beat Degale in the first fight had a lot to do with Adam Booth being in his corner. Saying all this though I think Groves does a lot of good stuff during fights but he does tend to make stupid mistakes so I would have to say Degale who would also be gunning for revenge and who looks like he ahs improved a lot since the first fight.

MarkMcBurney wrote:

crusader wrote:Going into their first bout Groves was a clear underdog despite besting Degale in the 2006 ABAs. While I think that Degale edged their pro bout it was very close and I believe the decision is generally regarded as fair. Now it seems like they may fight a third time, and even though Groves won each of their bouts I think that he will probably be the underdog again given recent form.

Who do you think would win a rematch?

Besting? Neither are travellers and neither quit...

Not sure what you mean.

I'd fancy DeGale if they fought again now.

DeGale has got over all his injuries & seems to be more mentally mature than previously.

Groves night have peaked & the defeats to Froch (the second specifically) must have knocked his confidence, despite what he keeps saying.

crusader wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:

crusader wrote:Going into their first bout Groves was a clear underdog despite besting Degale in the 2006 ABAs. While I think that Degale edged their pro bout it was very close and I believe the decision is generally regarded as fair. Now it seems like they may fight a third time, and even though Groves won each of their bouts I think that he will probably be the underdog again given recent form.

Who do you think would win a rematch?

Besting? Neither are travellers and neither quit...

Not sure what you mean.

Besting, or 'giving best' is a term used in traveller bare knuckle fights to concede or give in...

Degale would win this fight by stoppage

hearn has wembley booked again for the summer and i hope this is the wembley fight

I thought Degale edged both the amateur and pro fights. I expect him to edge it again if it happens but whether he gets the decision is another question

Groves clearly won for me and he'd do so again. Would love it if it was part of a big Wembley show alongside something like Joshua v Price and Callum Smith v someone like Rebrasse.

For me, and I agree with Law, in his pro fight - Groves fought the best he ever fought whereas DeGale slacked off and showed cockiness thinking he was going to catch up with Groves, he couldn't and lost the verdict though I thought he nicked it anyway.

If they fought again and DeGale is on the ball, he will beat him convincingly.

MarkMcBurney wrote:Groves clearly won for me and he'd do so again.

He didn't clearly win it, it was very close. I wouldn't argue with anyone who thought Groves won it but it
wasn't a clear win.

I'm not going to become tempted into going with current "form". If you wanna talk about form then it was only a year ago George was blistering against Froch. He hasn't regressed that much.
I think it would be super-close, but George must surely retain confidence from the fact that he has twice shared a ring with Degale and twice beaten him. And yet he must wonder what he has to do to make him go away......still, I suppose he'd get very nicely paid whether he won or lost either way.

DeGale would Knock him out, not because Groves is ruined but because James' confidence is sky high and been looking impressive, yes Periban maybe could have carried on but he hurt him badly and the same with Gonzalez too, in a rematch James would fight more aggressively this time as I think he was a bit too cautious in the first fight (Which I think he won anyway).

Fat Git wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:Groves clearly won for me and he'd do so again.

He didn't clearly win it, it was very close. I wouldn't argue with anyone who thought Groves won it but it
wasn't a clear win.

I thought he won clearly. Close, but a clear victory. What's difficult to understand about that? Opinions are like arseholes etc.

Haven't seen the amateur fight but degale won the pro fight imo. Since then i think degale has improved more than groves. I think degale wins a wide decision next time.

Groves stock falling faster than Tesco's !


#AndThePoo

MarkMcBurney wrote:

Fat Git wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:Groves clearly won for me and he'd do so again.

He didn't clearly win it, it was very close. I wouldn't argue with anyone who thought Groves won it but it
wasn't a clear win.

I thought he won clearly. Close, but a clear victory. What's difficult to understand about that? Opinions are like arseholes etc.

Opinions are, I thought DeGale won it, there was nothing clear about Groves win - a clear win would be 116-112 or a KO victory. Not two points difference between three judges.

G0mez wrote:Groves stock falling faster than Tesco's !


#AndThePoo

If Groves' stock falls then so does Froch's.

Fat Git wrote:
Opinions are, I thought DeGale won it, there was nothing clear about Groves win - a clear win would be 116-112 or a KO victory. Not two points difference between three judges.

No, I thought his victory was clear in a close fight. I didn't say he dominated, you're confusing yourself...

Horse wrote:

G0mez wrote:Groves stock falling faster than Tesco's !


#AndThePoo

If Groves' stock falls then so does Froch's.

I'm sure you will still have Groves top of your list despite two naff outings now.

MarkMcBurney wrote:

Fat Git wrote:
Opinions are, I thought DeGale won it, there was nothing clear about Groves win - a clear win would be 116-112 or a KO victory. Not two points difference between three judges.

No, I thought his victory was clear in a close fight. I didn't say he dominated, you're confusing yourself...

A clear win simply means there is no confusion to who won the fight - as you can see, there are a lot of people who thought DeGale won the fight - so it wasn't a clear win - even the decision with the judges was a majority decision - so it is hardly a clear win.

clear adjective \ˈklir\
: very obvious : not causing or allowing doubt

: easily understood

: free from doubt or confusion

http://ask.reference.com/web?s=t&q=clea ... 91&o=10616

G0mez wrote:I'm sure you will still have Groves top of your list despite two naff outings now.

He's never been top of my list. Froch is at the top.

Groves is where he deserves to be. You are just a hater.

Fat Git wrote:

MarkMcBurney wrote:

Fat Git wrote:
Opinions are, I thought DeGale won it, there was nothing clear about Groves win - a clear win would be 116-112 or a KO victory. Not two points difference between three judges.

No, I thought his victory was clear in a close fight. I didn't say he dominated, you're confusing yourself...

A clear win simply means there is no confusion to who won the fight - as you can see, there are a lot of people who thought DeGale won the fight - so it wasn't a clear win - even the decision with the judges was a majority decision - so it is hardly a clear win.

clear adjective \ˈklir\
: very obvious : not causing or allowing doubt

: easily understood

: free from doubt or confusion

http://ask.reference.com/web?s=t&q=clea ... 91&o=10616

Yes...and my OPINION is that there was no doubt that Groves won a close decision.

What don't you get about an opinion? I respect the fact that you have a different one but it doesn't change the fact that to me there was no doubt that Groves won.