Is Freddie Roach really a great trainer or just a great match-maker?

[JK1700]

Floyd is a much more talented boxer than Manny, I couldve trained Floyd to beat Marquez that night. you cant compare Roger and Freddie off of that. Its like Phil Jackson, is he the best coach or does he just have the best player in the world?

I knew somebody was going to use this excuse. People are always quick to say Manny is better and the biggest test for Floyd. But then you say I can't comapre their fights with Marquez? Why not? There's no reason why not. You will say "Floyd was bigger" but Marquez and Pacquiao are the same size. So Floyd will be "bigger" than Pacquiao if and when they fight.

If Pacquiao beats Mayweather then Roach is the greatest trainer ever. If Mayweather beats Pacquiao then people won't praise Roger. That's just not fair when the opinions on a Mayweather-Pacquiao fight are divided.

[JK1700]

58% say he's a great trainer. Why?

What specific fight makes him a great trainer? Name one....

[raysan]

You make a very good point. I think because Roach stuck around too long in boxing it gave him like a "sixth sense" where he can tell when fighters are in decline because he carried on too long.

Your other points are about him being a great trainer I don't really understand. You claim he's a great trainer because he knew Pacquiao couldnt beat Shane and therefore didnt make the fight? Surely that has to be considered great match making rather than being a great trainer?

I'm yet to have any evidence of what makes him a great trainer. As ive pointed out, in his biggest tests he has failed. Training De La Hoya to fight Mayweather was his biggest challenge and he failed. Oscar had every advantage. He had height, reach, weight and had been fighting at 154 for several years. Yet Roach couldnt come up with a winning gameplan.

And I don't buy the argument that Oscar lost because he "got tired". Oscar didnt really get into that fight until the mid rounds. I gave him the 12th round!

Him able to know what the other guy is going to do makes him a great trainer in my book. If we're just talking recent, look at the Ricky Hatton fight. Even after the fight, Manny was saying how Freddie and crew knew what Hatton was going to do and they practiced everyday. A trainer can only do so much based on the talent he has in front of him, but if he can tell you exactly what the other guy is going to do, doesnt that make him a great trainer?

[raysan]

I knew somebody was going to use this excuse. People are always quick to say Manny is better and the biggest test for Floyd. But then you say I can't comapre their fights with Marquez? Why not? There's no reason why not. You will say "Floyd was bigger" but Marquez and Pacquiao are the same size. So Floyd will be "bigger" than Pacquiao if and when they fight.

If Pacquiao beats Mayweather then Roach is the greatest trainer ever. If Mayweather beats Pacquiao then people won't praise Roger. That's just not fair when the opinions on a Mayweather-Pacquiao fight are divided.

I just give Floyd more credit than i give Roger, and I give Freddie more credit than i give Manny. Lets put it this way, youre going into a fight, would you hire Freddie or Roger?? Ive met Roger, hes a boxing historian, cool guy, but i trust Freddie's gameplanning over his. does that mean manny can beat floyd, in my eyes no because Floyd is so talented he figures fighters out HIMSELF, where as i cant see Manny doing that.

[JK1700]

Him able to know what the other guy is going to do makes him a great trainer in my book. If we're just talking recent, look at the Ricky Hatton fight. Even after the fight, Manny was saying how Freddie and crew knew what Hatton was going to do and they practiced everyday. A trainer can only do so much based on the talent he has in front of him, but if he can tell you exactly what the other guy is going to do, doesnt that make him a great trainer?

But that doesnt make him great because Hatton was coming off a KO loss. I'm not making an excuse this is just a fact. Ricky was brutally knocked out by Mayweather and nearly KO'd by Lazcano in his comeback fight in the U.K.

Beating him doesnt make you great. If two great fighters fight in their prime and have a draw and then one guy comes back and wins the rematch. Then THAT makes you a great trainer. Nacho Beristain did this with Ricardo Lopez after his first fight with Alvarez. Which he could have lost. Nacho took him back, made him see his mistakes and brought out the best in him in the rematch.

That's great because he looked at the other fighter and realised what he needed to improve and do to beat him. Fighting damaged opponents and knocking them out isnt proving anyone's genius. Pacquiao knocking out Cotto isnt anything special because he was knocked out by Margarito a few fights before. That win was NOT because of a great trainer. It was because of a great match-maker who knew Cotto was damaged.

[JK1700]

I just give Floyd more credit than i give Roger, and I give Freddie more credit than i give Manny. Lets put it this way, youre going into a fight, would you hire Freddie or Roger?? Ive met Roger, hes a boxing historian, cool guy, but i trust Freddie's gameplanning over his. does that mean manny can beat floyd, in my eyes no because Floyd is so talented he figures fighters out HIMSELF, where as i cant see Manny doing that.

I see your point and it's a good one. I don't know who I would ask to train me. Both of them are good trainers. I just think Roach is not as good as he's made out to be. I agree that Floyd could proberbly win without a trainer but at the same time it's terrible that Roger gets no credit. And Freddie gets all of the credit in the world. Anyway, I just don't see what makes Roach a great trainer. He's definetly a better match-maker than trainer.

[CUNTLEE]

damn good trainer

[CUNTLEE]

freddie is good at building a fighters confidence up with great matchmaking while working on the fighters flaws

[JK1700]

damn good trainer

What exactly makes him great? What fight?

Barrera is the only one you could argue makes him great. But let's not forget that Junior Jones also beat Barrera twice and lost to Morales just like Pacquiao. Does that make his trainer great?

The Morales wins are irrelevant since he was made to come down in weight after losing every round to Zahir Raheem. Raheem was a good fighter but by no means great. Roach didnt have to come up with a gameplan to beat Morales after the way he was dominated by Raheem and then killed his body to make 130. It doesnt take a genius to work out how to beat damaged opponents.

[raysan]

What exactly makes him great? What fight?

Barrera is the only one you could argue makes him great. But let's not forget that Junior Jones also beat Barrera twice and lost to Morales just like Pacquiao. Does that make his trainer great?

The Morales wins are irrelevant since he was made to come down in weight after losing every round to Zahir Raheem. Raheem was a good fighter but by no means great. Roach didnt have to come up with a gameplan to beat Morales after the way he was dominated by Raheem and then killed his body to make 130. It doesnt take a genius to work out how to beat damaged opponents.

Youre acting like fighters arent capable of winning after being beat. Veron Forrest whooped Shanes ass, does that mean i shouldnt give Floyd credit for beating Shane? Shane was considered top 3 ww at the time, previous losses didnt matter. just because you lose a fight doesnt mean you cant be great, when Floyd knocksout Manny are you not going to give him credit because Morales already beat him? Look man, if Freddie wasnt a great trainer do you think Mike Tyson, James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, Oscar Delahoya, all wouldve hired him at some point??