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

[Motofan]

Freddie's fighters can fight, so he doesnt suck. But people act like he has this brilliant mind that can solve any fighter/fight. The man has been around for years, and was nothing special before Pac made him look special. He is a good trainer, who is a great matchmaker. But he might as well retire when Pac hangs up the gloves.

[JK1700]

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??

No your missing the point! I was talking about knockout losses. I'm not saying they werent still capable and dangerous opponents. But the reality is that if a fighter has been brutally knocked out then he won't be the same fighter as he was before the knockout. My MAIN POINT is that beating a guy coming off a KO loss doesnt make you a great trainer.

Watch Ricardo Lopez vs Rosendo Alvarez I and then watch the 2nd fight straight afterwards. That is why Nacho Beristain is a great trainer. He took his fighter to the side and told him what he did wrong, what he needed to improve and how to win. And it worked, against a very good, prime, undefeated champion.

Roach TRIED to do this when Pacquiao fought Marquez and failed. There was no improvements from the 1st to 2nd fight. Roach didnt correct Pacquiao's mistakes. Nacho was able to correct Ricardo's mistakes. That's what makes a great trainer. Being able to look back correct your mistakes, improve your fighter and be able to excute in the ring.

I'm not hating on Roach, I think he is a good trainer. As you say that's why big name fighters have hired him but I don't see him as being great.

[JK1700]

Freddie's fighters can fight, so he doesnt suck. But people act like he has this brilliant mind that can solve any fighter/fight. The man has been around for years, and was nothing special before Pac made him look special. He is a good trainer, who is a great matchmaker. But he might as well retire when Pac hangs up the gloves.

Good post!

[JK1700]

Still no evidence of why Roach is a "great trainer"

[DONT HELP ME]

Still no evidence of why Roach is a "great trainer"

what evidence youre looking for? lets say someone give you an evidence, in your mind roach is still overrated.

[raysan]

No your missing the point! I was talking about knockout losses. I'm not saying they werent still capable and dangerous opponents. But the reality is that if a fighter has been brutally knocked out then he won't be the same fighter as he was before the knockout. My MAIN POINT is that beating a guy coming off a KO loss doesnt make you a great trainer.

Watch Ricardo Lopez vs Rosendo Alvarez I and then watch the 2nd fight straight afterwards. That is why Nacho Beristain is a great trainer. He took his fighter to the side and told him what he did wrong, what he needed to improve and how to win. And it worked, against a very good, prime, undefeated champion.

Roach TRIED to do this when Pacquiao fought Marquez and failed. There was no improvements from the 1st to 2nd fight. Roach didnt correct Pacquiao's mistakes. Nacho was able to correct Ricardo's mistakes. That's what makes a great trainer. Being able to look back correct your mistakes, improve your fighter and be able to excute in the ring.

Roach is a GOOD trainer but not a GREAT one.

Manny has been knocked out and now is looked at as one of the best in the world, so that now makes Freddie a great trainer right?? Marquez is a great fighter himself and makes adjustments in the ring, why are you basing everything off of that fight? Im a Floyd fan, but trying to discredit Roach is ridiculous, and im saying that as a boxing fan.

[JK1700]

Manny has been knocked out and now is looked at as one of the best in the world, so that now makes Freddie a great trainer right?? Marquez is a great fighter himself and makes adjustments in the ring, why are you basing everything off of that fight? Im a Floyd fan, but trying to discredit Roach is ridiculous, and im saying that as a boxing fan.

I'm not discrediting Roach. This has nothing to do with Floyd. It's just my honest opinion. There are lots of good trainers so what makes Roach stand out? Ok Pacquiao got knocked out and came back but does that make Roach great? Like you said about Floyd. I think Pacquiao has been more responsible for that than Roach. Freddie just picks his fights.

Great match-maker? Yes. Great trainer? No. Good but not great.

Just like fighters trainers prove their greatness when they are really up against it. Roach failed at his biggest challenges.

[DONT HELP ME]

i believe more than 70% of boxing trainers are good at match making

[JK1700]

what evidence youre looking for? lets say someone give you an evidence, in your mind roach is still overrated.

Just tell me. What makes him any better than Naazim Richardson or Nacho Beristain? Both of those trainers came up with great gameplans for fighters when they were up against it. Roach on the other hand failed in his biggest challenges and looks like a better trainer than he really is because of his match making abilities.

[RAV3N]

How come you cant use any fights that his fighters win as a good example of him as a traner but then you use the fights that his fighters lost as bad example of him as a trainer?

You are making your own rules to this argument, there is no point discussing this with you.