BoxRec

http://www.livefight.com/news.php?news_ ... =2015&m=03

Golovkin is too small for him Carl keeps trying to dismiss the GGG fight.

Maybe we will see Ward whooping his a$$ again though.

DeGale not a big fight, Golovkin too small, Ward too boring... so, who's a big fight for him? Chavez?

ikorolev wrote:http://www.livefight.com/news.php?news_ ... =2015&m=03

Golovkin is too small for him Carl keeps trying to dismiss the GGG fight.

Maybe we will see Ward whooping his a$$ again though.

Froch has it all to lose in the GGG fight. If he wins he just beat a MW (and not even a big MW). IF he loses it could be his last fight, going out on a loss isn't ideal. And again, he would be losing to a MW which wouldn't do his legacy any favours.

Some people have said it before, if anyone deserves to pick and choose his last 1 or 2 fights, it's Froch. What more do we want from him!?

If Froch loses, many would say that time caught up with him. No shame in that. Besides, if Golovkin beats Froch, he will probably proceed to beat more good fighters on his way to hall of fame, so again, there would be no shame in a loss to him.

ikorolev wrote:http://www.livefight.com/news.php?news_ ... =2015&m=03

Golovkin is too small for him Carl keeps trying to dismiss the GGG fight.

Maybe we will see Ward whooping his a$$ again though.

I couldn't imagine Froch having a case of the ducksies but I guess it's true! All these ducks are chickening out of the fight with GGG

Froch lacks boxing ability , just has a good chin, no wonder hes afraid of GGG

Martin Murray took a lot of shots against GGG and walked forward. Obviously they took their toll towards the end but ( a prime ) Froch is a bigger, better, tougher and far more awkward version of Murray. Anyone thinking GGG ( or anyone else ) has an easy night against a fit and firing Froch is a little deluded.

Before those with poor memories bring it up, no, not even Ward had an easy night against Froch. Andre was blowing out of his arse come the end of that fight and looked as uncomfortable as I have seen and as likely as we are going to see, him over the last 3/4 rounds. Andre beats him 10 times out of 10 no doubt but he doesn't 'school' him once.

The only way anyone enjoys an easy ride against Carl is if he is over the hill, which could well be the case.

closer wrote:Froch lacks boxing ability , just has a good chin, no wonder hes afraid of GGG

He isn't slick and doesn't look obviously skilled but the beauty of boxing is there is no fixed way to fight. Froch is as awkward as eff and that in itself needs plenty of boxing ability.

Not sure how a fighter who has hung with the likes of Kessler, Dirrell, Taylor, Pascal and co and only ever really been beat clearly by Ward ( who is elite, p4p level ) can be described as lacking boxing ability and is just a good chin! That's just a lazy description

Andrade is just a chin.

lillywhite14 wrote:Martin Murray took a lot of shots against GGG and walked forward. Obviously they took their toll towards the end but ( a prime ) Froch is a bigger, better, tougher and far more awkward version of Murray. Anyone thinking GGG ( or anyone else ) has an easy night against a fit and firing Froch is a little deluded.

Before those with poor memories bring it up, no, not even Ward had an easy night against Froch. Andre was blowing out of his arse come the end of that fight and looked as uncomfortable as I have seen and as likely as we are going to see, him over the last 3/4 rounds. Andre beats him 10 times out of 10 no doubt but he doesn't 'school' him once.

The only way anyone enjoys an easy ride against Carl is if he is over the hill, which could well be the case.

He's already schooled him!

fergusg wrote: If Froch was given £10m to face Gennady Golovkin, like he earned against George Groves, with the Kazakh competing on foreign soil, then I'm sure the fight could be made.

So, why can't Hearn organize a Wembley bout against GGG with £10m for Froch and whatever Groves earned for GGG ?

ikorolev wrote:

fergusg wrote: If Froch was given £10m to face Gennady Golovkin, like he earned against George Groves, with the Kazakh competing on foreign soil, then I'm sure the fight could be made.

So, why can't Hearn organize a Wembley bout against GGG with £10m for Froch and whatever Groves earned for GGG ?

Because that sort of money isn't there for a fight against Golovkin.

danamba7 wrote:

ikorolev wrote:http://www.livefight.com/news.php?news_ ... =2015&m=03

Golovkin is too small for him Carl keeps trying to dismiss the GGG fight.

Maybe we will see Ward whooping his a$$ again though.

Froch has it all to lose in the GGG fight. If he wins he just beat a MW (and not even a big MW). IF he loses it could be his last fight, going out on a loss isn't ideal. And again, he would be losing to a MW which wouldn't do his legacy any favours.

Some people have said it before, if anyone deserves to pick and choose his last 1 or 2 fights, it's Froch. What more do we want from him!?

GGG isn't an option, having stated more than once he isn't ready to move to 168lbs, so why does Froch keep rattling on about him? (for what it's worth I reckon he'd lose in a similar fashion to Murray)

So Froch doesn't want GGG (not a factor anyway) doesn't want Ward, doesn't want Degale, DID want Hopkins then changed his mind, it will be f*cking hilarious if he gets him dream fight with Fatty Chavez and ends up getting battered.

I would laugh, long and hard ... yes

expe wrote:

lillywhite14 wrote:Martin Murray took a lot of shots against GGG and walked forward. Obviously they took their toll towards the end but ( a prime ) Froch is a bigger, better, tougher and far more awkward version of Murray. Anyone thinking GGG ( or anyone else ) has an easy night against a fit and firing Froch is a little deluded.

Before those with poor memories bring it up, no, not even Ward had an easy night against Froch. Andre was blowing out of his arse come the end of that fight and looked as uncomfortable as I have seen and as likely as we are going to see, him over the last 3/4 rounds. Andre beats him 10 times out of 10 no doubt but he doesn't 'school' him once.

The only way anyone enjoys an easy ride against Carl is if he is over the hill, which could well be the case.

He's already schooled him!

Depends how you class a schooling though Expe. I didn't see a schooling. Just like I didn't see a schooling when Barrera beat Naz, another fight that often gets remembered as a complete shut out.
Calzaghe schooled Lacy. That's the type of completely one sided victory I class as a schooling

expe wrote:

ikorolev wrote:

fergusg wrote: If Froch was given £10m to face Gennady Golovkin, like he earned against George Groves, with the Kazakh competing on foreign soil, then I'm sure the fight could be made.

So, why can't Hearn organize a Wembley bout against GGG with £10m for Froch and whatever Groves earned for GGG ?

Because that sort of money isn't there for a fight against Golovkin.

So, it was there for a "super star" Groves, but it is not there for Golovkin ? I doubt that it is true. If it is, isn't it promoter's work to actually promote a fight educating people that Golovkin is a much bigger name than Groves and that Froch vs GGG will be fireworks for as long as it lasts ?

Tristram Shandy wrote:GGG isn't an option, having stated more than once he isn't ready to move to 168lbs, so why does Froch keep rattling on about him? (for what it's worth I reckon he'd lose in a similar fashion to Murray)

So Froch doesn't want GGG (not a factor anyway) doesn't want Ward, doesn't want Degale, DID want Hopkins then changed his mind, it will be f*cking hilarious if he gets him dream fight with Fatty Chavez and ends up getting battered.

I would laugh, long and hard ... yes

GGG would take a Froch fight at 168 if he gets millions like Groves did. He clearly stated that he will go up or down for a PPV fight.

ikorolev wrote:

expe wrote:

ikorolev wrote:
So, why can't Hearn organize a Wembley bout against GGG with £10m for Froch and whatever Groves earned for GGG ?

Because that sort of money isn't there for a fight against Golovkin.

So, it was there for a "super star" Groves, but it is not there for Golovkin ? I doubt that it is true. If it is, isn't it promoter's work to actually promote a fight educating people that Golovkin is a much bigger name than Groves and that Froch vs GGG will be fireworks for as long as it lasts ?

Golovkin isn't a bigger name than Groves here, that's the point. They can hype it up as much as they want, it won't do anywhere near the sort of numbers the second fight did.

lillywhite14 wrote:

expe wrote:

lillywhite14 wrote:Martin Murray took a lot of shots against GGG and walked forward. Obviously they took their toll towards the end but ( a prime ) Froch is a bigger, better, tougher and far more awkward version of Murray. Anyone thinking GGG ( or anyone else ) has an easy night against a fit and firing Froch is a little deluded.

Before those with poor memories bring it up, no, not even Ward had an easy night against Froch. Andre was blowing out of his arse come the end of that fight and looked as uncomfortable as I have seen and as likely as we are going to see, him over the last 3/4 rounds. Andre beats him 10 times out of 10 no doubt but he doesn't 'school' him once.

The only way anyone enjoys an easy ride against Carl is if he is over the hill, which could well be the case.

He's already schooled him!

Depends how you class a schooling though Expe. I didn't see a schooling. Just like I didn't see a schooling when Barrera beat Naz, another fight that often gets remembered as a complete shut out.
Calzaghe schooled Lacy. That's the type of completely one sided victory I class as a schooling

Froch was schooled for 10 rounds, then won the last two as Ward faded, until then though it was one sided, Ward beat Froch at his own game, stronger than him up close and picked him off all fight while one of his hands was broken. I agree with you on Naz and Barrera, it wasn't anywhere near a shutout, but Naz was put in his place by Barrera and it gets called a schooling when Naz won 3-5 rounds in that fight.

expe wrote:

ikorolev wrote:

expe wrote: Because that sort of money isn't there for a fight against Golovkin.

So, it was there for a "super star" Groves, but it is not there for Golovkin ? I doubt that it is true. If it is, isn't it promoter's work to actually promote a fight educating people that Golovkin is a much bigger name than Groves and that Froch vs GGG will be fireworks for as long as it lasts ?

Golovkin isn't a bigger name than Groves here, that's the point. They can hype it up as much as they want, it won't do anywhere near the sort of numbers the second fight did.

That makes me feel sorry for those "fans". They don't learn when their "stars" get beaten by journeymen like Khomitsky and don't appreciate real stars.

It does make me laugh how easily people write of Froch against GGG.

GGG who has not fought a single 168 lb fighter, let alone an elite level one with such proven durability and will to win.

Froch is bigger, tougher, and all around better than ANYONE GGG has fought to date - now maybe, yes maybe, GGG could win it, but to suggest he blows Carl away is lunacy.

Of course Carl might be in decline, but I think he is far from being past it.

I think that Barrera got the better of 9 rounds against Naz and generally won his rounds much bigger, with about all the memorable work coming from MAB. Naz did have some moments and it wasn't a schooling in the sense of a Lacy-JC or Hopkins-Pavlik disparity between competitors, but I don't have a problem with people acting like MAB dominated. Ward throughly dominated Froch for about the first 10 rounds, but he did fade and Froch wasn't without success. Like MAB-Naz it wasn't a schooling in the sense of the examples I listed above, but I think anything from 10-2 to 8-4 is fair and I consider it a fairly dominant showing from Ward.

Froch is very durable, significantly bigger, and more of a front-foot threat than anyone GGG has faced, so I also don't see how he can be treated like an inevitable victim so readily. In fact, I think he's got the right attributes to exploit GGG's weaknesses, of which being ineffective on the back foot, where I think Froch would have a good chance of regularly putting him, is a notable one. Defense may be an issue for Froch and I think he'd be more likely to walk onto a shot than Murray was, but GGG hasn't proven that he'd still be a serious banger at 168, let alone someone with the power to have a major impact on arguably most durable fighter at the weight, and one can look at Arthur Abraham to see that power doesn't always carry up.

crusader wrote:GGG hasn't proven that he'd still be a serious banger at 168, and one can look at Arthur Abraham to see that power doesn't always carry up.

Abraham's whole style is based on physical strength and power, but he isn't much of a boxer. His strength and power were negated somewhat at 168lbs and his limitations as 'boxer' badly exposed. GGG has MUCH more than simply strength and power, he is one of the most efficient and complete fighters I've ever seen. I don't think he will 'blow away' Froch but I can see Froch taking a fairly one sided beating before succumbing in the later rounds like Murray. Froch simply doesn't have the skill to outbox GGG and it's unlikely he can flatten him with one punch (the second Groves apart, when does Froch take anyone out with a single shot?)

I agree that GGG is more well-rounded than AA, but my point when mentioning the latter was simply that power doesn't always carry up. While GGG would likely have more abilities to rely than AAA, if his power had significantly less impact opponents I don't see how that wouldn't make him less effective than he is at 160. I believe opponents would be more willing to engage him, and in my view this is when he has his biggest problems, as his defense isn't good and he's fairly ineffective when backed up. He also couldn't so readily count on being able to quickly turn a fight around in which an opponent is holding their own, and I think he'd end up dropping more rounds if the impact of his shots was significantly diminished upon moving up.

Of course his power may carry up fine and what I've discussed may not be an issue, but it's still a question at least until he moves up.

Froch is not much bigger than Murray or Rubio, so I don't know where doubts about Golovkin's power at 168 are coming from.

I think he's bigger than both of them and he's very durable. Murray also lasted significantly longer than most GGG opponents and Rubio wasn't so much naturally big for the weight as he was flabby in the middle, as in addition to weighing only 157 about a year before facing GGG he spent much of his career fighting at 154.