Carl Froch Plans To Punish Jermain Taylor in April

[STEELHEAD]

I hope Froch gets some success drumming up some interest for this fight. I've heard that the yanks a pretty much uninterested in this fight thereby unfortunately proving HBO correct when they wouldn't approve of Taylor fighting anyone else than Kessler or Winky.

I got Taylor by UD or late stoppage.

i don't know batt.
the facts this guy raises is making me start to think... :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3_au...e=channel_page

froch imo is bigger stronger faster than pavlik.

[egreezy]

i don't know batt.
the facts this guy raises is making me start to think... :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3_au...e=channel_page

froch imo is bigger stronger faster than pavlik.

Froch fight nothing like Pavlik and isn't faster than Pavlik, he also says Pascal is bett than Taylor

[NakiFan]

That guy on gamblers advisory is almost always right.

Froch is going to punish Taylor, this is all substance over style, I see this fight as Ross Kemp Vs Chris Tucker, and there can only be one outcome.

[BattlingNelson]

i don't know batt.
the facts this guy raises is making me start to think... :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3_au...e=channel_page

froch imo is bigger stronger faster than pavlik.

3 points:

1: Taylor should be significantly faster than Froch
2: Froch is very loose in his guard and easy to hit
3: This is the big-time for froch. It's a first and it's away from home.

[NakiFan]

3 points.
Froch Should Be significantly stronger than Taylor
Froch has a much better chin than Taylor
Froch is fast enough to land plenty on Taylor

[BattlingNelson]

3 points.
Froch Should Be significantly stronger than Taylor
Froch has a much better chin than Taylor
Froch is fast enough to land plenty on Taylor

Good ones!

Still I always prefer brain over brawn. Should be a very interesting fight.

[NakiFan]

Indeed I look forward to this one quite a bit actually.

[Memeori]

Not sure how these clash of styles will mix.

That's the fun of boxing, so instead of over-analysing the fight saying why or which fighter is going to win I'll just wait, because its very unpredictible IMO.

[Dave Rado]

I just think its insane to think JT's win(s) where more controversial than JC.

After the first fight:

boxing.about.com:

Taylor won the first fight by controversial split decision but was unhappy with his performance and has vowed to do better the second time around. In contrast, Hopkins - who gave away too many early rounds in their first meeting - was satisfied with his performance and insists he was robbed.

USA Today:

Vegas oddsmakers view the rematch as a virtual tossup after Taylor's controversial victory five months ago ended Hopkins' division-record streak of 20 successful title defenses

New York Times:

In their first bout, on July 16, Taylor won a controversial split decision to hand Hopkins his first defeat in 12 years and take over the championship belts.

After the second fight:


Boxingscene.com

In need of a clear, decisive win to cement his identity, Taylor’s rematch with Hopkins was twelve rounds more of the same – the same tentative performance, the same mechanical and mental flaws, the same unanimous decision going his way while a majority of informed observers filled their cards out in favor of the forty-year-old.

the sweet science:

Sometimes controversy is as clear as things will ever get.

Jermain Taylor and Bernard Hopkins could fight all they want and it would probably always be close and disputed. That's not to say it would always be thrilling. Taylor successfully held on to his middleweight title, but if you listened to the people from ringside to rafter at Mandalay Bay arena whether he proved to be the better fighter tonight is still highly debatable.

All judges (Dave Moretti, Chuck Giampa, Patricia Morse Jarman) saw it at 115-113 for the defending champion.

The result was less clear to the rest of us. An informal exit poll showed equal support for each side. Maybe the question is whether or not Hopkins did enough to take the unified belts. The intangible edge said to favor a champ may have been the only margin of victory Taylor had. Such an edge is not actually supposed to exist on the scorecards.

[Kris Silver]

After the first fight:

boxing.about.com:

Taylor won the first fight by controversial split decision but was unhappy with his performance and has vowed to do better the second time around. In contrast, Hopkins - who gave away too many early rounds in their first meeting - was satisfied with his performance and insists he was robbed.

USA Today:

Vegas oddsmakers view the rematch as a virtual tossup after Taylor's controversial victory five months ago ended Hopkins' division-record streak of 20 successful title defenses

New York Times:

In their first bout, on July 16, Taylor won a controversial split decision to hand Hopkins his first defeat in 12 years and take over the championship belts.

After the second fight:


Boxingscene.com

In need of a clear, decisive win to cement his identity, Taylor’s rematch with Hopkins was twelve rounds more of the same – the same tentative performance, the same mechanical and mental flaws, the same unanimous decision going his way while a majority of informed observers filled their cards out in favor of the forty-year-old.

the sweet science:

Sometimes controversy is as clear as things will ever get.

Jermain Taylor and Bernard Hopkins could fight all they want and it would probably always be close and disputed. That's not to say it would always be thrilling. Taylor successfully held on to his middleweight title, but if you listened to the people from ringside to rafter at Mandalay Bay arena whether he proved to be the better fighter tonight is still highly debatable.

All judges (Dave Moretti, Chuck Giampa, Patricia Morse Jarman) saw it at 115-113 for the defending champion.

The result was less clear to the rest of us. An informal exit poll showed equal support for each side. Maybe the question is whether or not Hopkins did enough to take the unified belts. The intangible edge said to favor a champ may have been the only margin of victory Taylor had. Such an edge is not actually supposed to exist on the scorecards.

Very good research and post Dave. Tried to give you green k but couldn't.

Calzaghe landed more on Hops then anyone ever had, and actually got a wider score card from one judge aswell than JT managed in two fights; 116-111.

It was very close to a UD really, and in polls most clearly think Calzaghe won a close fight, by 2-3 rounds.