Hennesy to announce brit tv deal for Froch-Kessler.

so primetime channel that is ppv that was showing all the fights whats happend to that or is the cobra fight going to be aired for fee in uk on uk channel

Let's hope it's on a decent channel, not a newly-created PPV one from the people responsible for gay porn films, that most people can't get access to and that messes up the first fight they broadcast. Because that's exactly how things were last time. The fight is in Europe and will take place at a reasonable time. There is no reason to not have this on BBC or ITV. Even if the money offered isn't great, it'll boost Froch's popularity for the future because it'll be watched by 5+ million people instead of 20,000 or even less. That's pretty much what Sauerland did when Kessler fought Perdomo. They had the fight on national tv (TV2) resulting in gigantic ratings. Furthermore it meant that Sauerland earlier this year made a deal with TV2 which ensures lots of danish boxing on national TV in the coming years. :)

Khan: Dodges the best fighters in the division, gets KOed by journeymen, ducks his mandatories, only fights light punchers and even has contracts signed so dangerous punchers must stay away from him. Froch: Takes on all the best in his division. Signs contracts to fight all the biggest punchers. Undefeated. shattered jaw: terrible poster,has obsessive hatred for certain guys,lacks boxing knowledge,posts things so stupid that they are laughable,is a joke

Khan: Dodges the best fighters in the division, gets KOed by journeymen, ducks his mandatories, only fights light punchers and even has contracts signed so dangerous punchers must stay away from him. Froch: Takes on all the best in his division. Signs contracts to fight all the biggest punchers. Undefeated.

"Amir Khan is like fast, and does super cool shuffles with his feet and a bunch of other sh*t that doesn't really matter. So having fast hands as a boxer doesn't really matter? This comment is almost unforgivable it's that daft. He is great at running away from trouble and covering up his face with his gloves. The art to boxing is to hit, and not be hit. That's how you WIN. Defence even using speed is very important, and accuracy and punch connect ratio's are to in order to win a boxing match unless you get a KO. Khan gets hit less, and hits his opponents more. Therefore there's a far more logical argument in him being a better boxer. Yeah he lost in 30 seconds to a complete piece of crap but that is usually a sign of greatness. After all, all the good ones like Ray Leonard and Ray Robinson were knocked out in the first round by bums and they turned out great." Now this comment actually is unforgivable. You clearly can't judge boxers based on their talents in the ring in all the common area's commentators, judges and fans generally do in scoring fights, and ranking fighters. You see things so plainly as to only take in whose never lost must be best. As a Calzaghe fan, even I can accept this isn't the be all and end all. Greats such as the names you mention, suffer losses. It's how they come back. Froch likely never being KO'd, does not make him better than Ray Robinson. You fail to accept the simple fact that a fighter who doesn't get dropped on his ass by a grazing punch will always be superior to one who does. No you fail to accept the simple fact that is wrong. A boxers chin is but a mere ONE element of his entire game to rank him on, and beyond that it's one he largely doesn't improve and earn himself through talent. Talent and boxing ability is not all in chin, if you think this your an utter fool whom perhaps thinks Margarito and Andrade would be some of the best boxers to grace the sport had they not lost once/twice. Really wouldn't surprise me because your logic undeniably indicates such a thing. I honestly can't even believe the garbage you guys are saying that's why it doesn't inspire me to have an open debate. This after some of the things you've just said is quite ridiculous, you really are generalising others whilst making ridiculous isolated thinking comments so there's no point bothering.

I just know I am unbiased on this matter. I don't like Froch at all and am not a fan. I don't have any reason or ulterior motive for putting him on a pedestal. The rest of you are fans of Haye or Khan, or both, which makes you biased. I'm not listening to your opinions because they don't make sense. This is what am hearing from you guys.... "Who cares if Carl Froch finishes all his fights, has never lost, and takes on all challengers? Amir Khan is like fast, and does super cool shuffles with his feet and a bunch of other sh*t that doesn't really matter. He is great at running away from trouble and covering up his face with his gloves. Yeah he lost in 30 seconds to a complete piece of crap but that is usually a sign of greatness. After all, all the good ones like Ray Leonard and Ray Robinson were knocked out in the first round by bums and they turned out great." I honestly can't even believe the garbage you guys are saying that's why it doesn't inspire me to have an open debate. You fail to accept the simple fact that a fighter who doesn't get dropped on his ass by a grazing punch will always be superior to one who does. lol keep it coming kid your obsessive hate is fukkin hilarious,pathetic yes,but hilarious none the same

You also have a deep hatred and deslike for Khan and Haye, so does that make your opinion of them unbiased? The computer says 'No'.

Dude, essentially your responses come down to, I don't care, everyone's wrong because this, and I'm right. That's dis-apointing and doesn't show much open ness to debate or take into account public opinion. Ok there's some idiots out there but that doesn't mean all. Don't insult everyone's intelligence and say they're wrong and stupid, just because you disagree. That's plain arrogance. . I just know I am unbiased on this matter. I don't like Froch at all and am not a fan. I don't have any reason or ulterior motive for putting him on a pedestal. The rest of you are fans of Haye or Khan, or both, which makes you biased. I'm not listening to your opinions because they don't make sense. This is what am hearing from you guys.... "Who cares if Carl Froch finishes all his fights, has never lost, and takes on all challengers? Amir Khan is like fast, and does super cool shuffles with his feet and a bunch of other sh*t that doesn't really matter. He is great at running away from trouble and covering up his face with his gloves. Yeah he lost in 30 seconds to a complete piece of crap but that is usually a sign of greatness. After all, all the good ones like Ray Leonard and Ray Robinson were knocked out in the first round by bums and they turned out great." I honestly can't even believe the garbage you guys are saying that's why it doesn't inspire me to have an open debate. You fail to accept the simple fact that a fighter who doesn't get dropped on his ass by a grazing punch will always be superior to one who does.

Not a chance. I'm not betting on Froch. I can't stand the cunt and I sure as hell am not going to root for him. That doesn't change the fact that he is a better fighter than Haye or Khan. It' pretty simple. If all 3 of the best British fighters fought the best opposition at their weight they would all lose. Really Froch is just the best of a sorry bunch because he actually desires to fight the best and hasn't humiliated himself in the ring already. Nor has he ever ducked a big fight they way Haye and Khan do every single time. He has balls and a chin and power. Sad to say that's all it takes to be better than the rest of the UK funky bunch. If Froch didn;t have a chin, then he would be humiliated already. Him being tough is good for boxing, you need it, but that isn't down to him working hard in the gym, well not as much as hard work in the gym for skills. He is well conditioned, but no way he is better than Haye. Skillwise, he is way behind them both. Boxing in the UK is not that great, there are still boxers, but it's lost the appeal. OK no bet then buddy

Hitman 1 mill on kessler over froch. Yes or no? Not a chance. I'm not betting on Froch. I can't stand the cunt and I sure as hell am not going to root for him. That doesn't change the fact that he is a better fighter than Haye or Khan. It' pretty simple. If all 3 of the best British fighters fought the best opposition at their weight they would all lose. Really Froch is just the best of a sorry bunch because he actually desires to fight the best and hasn't humiliated himself in the ring already. Nor has he ever ducked a big fight they way Haye and Khan do every single time. He has balls and a chin and power. Sad to say that's all it takes to be better than the rest of the UK funky bunch.

Hitman 1 mill on kessler over froch. Yes or no?

And I am not a Carl Froch fan by any stretch. I personally cant stand the guy and want to see him lose. That being said I give credit where credit is due and he is a tough sonofabitch who loves to fight and wants to prove he is the best in the ring. That's way more than you can say for Haye or Khan who are more concerned about their looks than proving their worth in a boxing ring. I guess I can't blame Brits for wishing on a crackpipe that Haye or Khan turn out great because things look really bleak for the future of UK boxing. Froch will lose eventually as well. But I am 100% sure he won't be going out like a punk bitch like Haye did vs Thompson and Khan did vs Prescott. haha you are one of the worst posters on here,absolutely hilarious though you talk about british fighters getting knocked out,cherry-picking,ducking etc,which is all well and good until you admit you are an erdei nuthugger zsolt fukkin erdei,the biggest bitch champion in the sport,hes almost as much of a joke as you

It's because British fans are hoping that Khan or Haye turn out to be great. They know Froch isn't an all time great in the making and they want Khan or Haye to pick up the torch that Lewis left behind. The reality is that you're all gonna be disappointed when Khan and Haye have turned themselves into punch lines with their refusals to take on challenges and their embarrassing losses. I really don't care what the vote is because most of the people who voted are idiots who don't know anything about the sport. If you voted that Khan is better than Froch when Khan was knocked out in 15 seconds then you are an idiot. Plain and simple. Froch will never lose in such fashion, and he won't lose to anyone as average as Prescott. Dude, essentially your responses come down to, I don't care, everyone's wrong because this, and I'm right. That's dis-apointing and doesn't show much open ness to debate or take into account public opinion. Ok there's some idiots out there but that doesn't mean all. Don't insult everyone's intelligence and say they're wrong and stupid, just because you disagree. That's plain arrogance. Now, these things are always somewhat subjective, which you demonstrate being your self yet refuse to accept others being so. Your point in case can be griddled down to Froch's better because he has a tough chin and hasn't, and likely won't get KO'd. So he could be a punch bag and lose entire fights, but just not get KO'd and he'd be better? Another persons case in point may be Khan's activity, speed, foot work, and combinations are better. Now that's somewhat more weighty, after-all he has to make do without a chin, whereas Froch sometimes relies on it. So who really is better if neither had good chins for eg? For the record I hadn't even given much thought to whose a better champ between Khan and Froch. Resume & toughness Froch hands down yes. As for who is a better boxer all considered on numerous levels, it's quite simply Khan. P4p skill wise as a boxer, he's simply streaks better in most departments.

And I am not a Carl Froch fan by any stretch. I personally cant stand the guy and want to see him lose. That being said I give credit where credit is due and he is a tough sonofabitch who loves to fight and wants to prove he is the best in the ring. That's way more than you can say for Haye or Khan who are more concerned about their looks than proving their worth in a boxing ring. I guess I can't blame Brits for wishing on a crackpipe that Haye or Khan turn out great because things look really bleak for the future of UK boxing. Froch will lose eventually as well. But I am 100% sure he won't be going out like a punk bitch like Haye did vs Thompson and Khan did vs Prescott. If being tough makes you a better champ, then so be it. Haye and Khan have better skills and boxing ability. Froch is indeed very tough and his chin is pretty good. Let's see how he does VS Allen Green or someone with enough power, speed and skill to expose that defense. I give Kessler a good chance to win. 1 mill on Kessler. Taking the bet Hitman?

You are right to talk up Haye's resume as many people down play it. You say Taylor was done after wars with Pavlik? What about Mormeck at aged 36 having those wars with Bell? Also, Taylor was fine in the second fight... it was a close fight. Who cares if Pascal is a 'big' name? He showed how game and talented he was in his two awesome fights with Diaconu and a KO over a Branco. LAWL... Valuev is just incomparable to anyone. He's the worst boxer I've ever seen... he is just huge. I'm not convinced Macca is better than Dirrell either... Dirrell is a way, way smarter boxer although Macca obviously held a title and defended it for a good while. Froch has faced some very decent and comparable opposition to Haye in my eyes. It's Khan that lags way behind both. Valuev is hard to beat at this stage. Taylor at this moment is easier to beat. The second fight was close I agree, but Pavlik is totally rubbish at higher weights. He looked a lot more sluggish with the catch weight IMO. It also showed VS Hopkins. Mormeck was out of prime, but he is better than Pascal. Haye went there to Mormeck's home town and beat him. Pascal is decent, but honestly he is not great at all for me. He wouldn't win against the likes of Dawson for me. Heck cloud has him beat IMO. I would also put Hopkins and Tarver above him because they have better quality. If Pascal beats better people, then I will hold that win more highly. Dirrell isn't that smart. He had the wrong atactics by holding vs Froch. He is athletically gifted, but Macca was a good fighter at that stage and better than Dirrell. How many Dirrell fights have you seen? He is pretty green. I am a khan fan but agree he lags behind. However Frpch is 30 or something and Haye is near. Khan has time and if he can improve, he has a good chance to better them noth if his chin or defence holds up.

This guy is right. KrisSilver you are a joke. Khan a better champion than Froch? Please. Khan is a a baby lamb who has fought nowhere near the competition Froch has even though they had the same number of amateur and professional fights. On top of that he has been knocked unconscious in 54 seconds by a journeyman noone had ever heard of. Those are the kinds of guys Froch eats for breakfast after taking a few good licks on the chin. He now is also hand picking his opponents and having TV companies ensure his china isn't checked by a crude slugger in Maidana for at least another year. All the while Froch takes on: Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell and Kessler in a row. LMFAO. Imagine Roach lining up Bradely, Peterson, Alexander and Maidana for Khan!!!! NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BOY. And do you know why? Because Froch is a better profesional boxer than Khan. And I am not a Carl Froch fan by any stretch. I personally cant stand the guy and want to see him lose. That being said I give credit where credit is due and he is a tough sonofabitch who loves to fight and wants to prove he is the best in the ring. That's way more than you can say for Haye or Khan who are more concerned about their looks than proving their worth in a boxing ring. I guess I can't blame Brits for wishing on a crackpipe that Haye or Khan turn out great because things look really bleak for the future of UK boxing. Froch will lose eventually as well. But I am 100% sure he won't be going out like a punk bitch like Haye did vs Thompson and Khan did vs Prescott.

I agree Haye and Kahn have flaws, but they are better than Froch. Froch has not faced better guys though. Taylor was done by Pavlik twice. Froch was very close to lsoing that. Dirrell is green and can not be said to be good or great yet. Also it was very close Pascal may be a champ at light heavy, but what makes him good or great? It was damn exciting, but Pascal is not a name. Haye faced Mormeck who is better than Pascal. Valuev is better than Taylor at this stage of his career. Look how he lost to Abraham aswell... Maccanernnli is better than Dirrell. Haye got TKO'D actually. In his 10th fight VS an old guy, but a good fighter. Froch has been lucky not to have faced better guys IMO and it will show VS Kessler. 1 mill on Kessler. This bet is just for you You are right to talk up Haye's resume as many people down play it. You say Taylor was done after wars with Pavlik? What about Mormeck at aged 36 having those wars with Bell? Also, Taylor was fine in the second fight... it was a close fight. Who cares if Pascal is a 'big' name? He showed how game and talented he was in his two awesome fights with Diaconu and a KO over a Branco. LAWL... Valuev is just incomparable to anyone. He's the worst boxer I've ever seen... he is just huge. I'm not convinced Macca is better than Dirrell either... Dirrell is a way, way smarter boxer although Macca obviously held a title and defended it for a good while. Froch has faced some very decent and comparable opposition to Haye in my eyes. It's Khan that lags way behind both.

Valuev is better than Taylor at this stage of his career. Look how he lost to Abraham aswell... Maccanernnli is better than Dirrell. 1 mill on Kessler. This bet is just for you First of all Valuev's performances have been declining as rapidly as Taylor's. For you to say Valuev is better than a guy who was undisputed middleweight champion is laughable. As if that wasn't funny enough you then say that Enzo is better than Andre Dirrell.. (nobody will agree with you on that one) I rest my case. As I said earlier, the people who think Khan and Haye are superior are idiots. If anyone needs proof look no farther than this guys post.

He's the only one who hasnt been KO'd by an old man or a journeyman. It's even more obvious that Froch is better when you consider that the competition he has faced is much higher than either Khan or Haye have faced. Actually I think it will be years before Khan or Haye fight someone who is even a challenge they're such pussies when it comes to handpicking their opponets. I agree Haye and Kahn have flaws, but they are better than Froch. Froch has not faced better guys though. Taylor was done by Pavlik twice. Froch was very close to lsoing that. Dirrell is green and can not be said to be good or great yet. Also it was very close Pascal may be a champ at light heavy, but what makes him good or great? It was damn exciting, but Pascal is not a name. Haye faced Mormeck who is better than Pascal. Valuev is better than Taylor at this stage of his career. Look how he lost to Abraham aswell... Maccanernnli is better than Dirrell. Haye got TKO'D actually. In his 10th fight VS an old guy, but a good fighter. Froch has been lucky not to have faced better guys IMO and it will show VS Kessler. 1 mill on Kessler. This bet is just for you

It's because British fans are hoping that Khan or Haye turn out to be great. They know Froch isn't an all time great in the making and they want Khan or Haye to pick up the torch that Lewis left behind. The reality is that you're all gonna be disappointed when Khan and Haye have turned themselves into punch lines with their refusals to take on challenges and their embarrassing losses. I really don't care what the vote is because most of the people who voted are idiots who don't know anything about the sport. If you voted that Khan is better than Froch when Khan was knocked out in 15 seconds then you are an idiot. Plain and simple. Froch will never lose in such fashion, and he won't lose to anyone as average as Prescott. This guy is right. KrisSilver you are a joke. Khan a better champion than Froch? Please. Khan is a a baby lamb who has fought nowhere near the competition Froch has even though they had the same number of amateur and professional fights. On top of that he has been knocked unconscious in 54 seconds by a journeyman noone had ever heard of. Those are the kinds of guys Froch eats for breakfast after taking a few good licks on the chin. He now is also hand picking his opponents and having TV companies ensure his china isn't checked by a crude slugger in Maidana for at least another year. All the while Froch takes on: Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell and Kessler in a row. LMFAO. Imagine Roach lining up Bradely, Peterson, Alexander and Maidana for Khan!!!! NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BOY. And do you know why? Because Froch is a better profesional boxer than Khan.