Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Freddie Roach overrated?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    you want to see a sorry worthless trainer....

    Comment


    • #42
      As difficult as it sounds to call a world-class trainer overrated...yes Roach does get a bit more praise for his accomplishments than he sometimes should and the same with things with small mistakes his fighters make going uncriticized.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by Brother Jay View Post
        This post expresses the very reason that I disliked "On Freddie Roach".

        When you really look at what Roach has done, its not that impressive.

        A trainer's claim to fame isn't who he's worked with. Trainers work with different guys all the time.

        ****m Richardson told all of you that he isn't looking for credit because he worked with BHOP and Mosley. He admitted that these men already had their styles and habits put into place. He was just there to oversee training, put together a gameplan and make sure that everything goes smooth.

        That was brutal honesty from a man who could have milked the hell out of Hopkins' success at such an advanced age and made it all about himself for the sake of his own promotion.

        When you think of GREAT trainers, one should think of a trainer who has either produced a phenom or made such dramatic changes to a fighter that his success is clearly due to those changes.

        When I think of recent trainers who embody the former, I think of Floyd Mayweather Sr, Nacho Beristain, Jack Mosley, Virgil Hunter and Gary Russell Sr.

        When I think of recent trainers the have the ability to bring about necessary changes, I think of Buddy McGirt, Ronnie Shields, Robert Garcia and Manny Steward(who only has his fighter box one way).

        Pacquiao IS Freddie Roach's career. Freddie Roach is not responsible for Pacquiao's ascension, as Manny has not changed his boxing style or elevated his skills. Pac is the same fighter that he has always been, with some polish that doesn't serve to help him when he's fighting ANYTHING but a forward moving plodder.

        All of Roach's fighters are flawed the same way:

        Lack of defense
        Lack of decent in-fighting ability
        Lack of ability to adapt during the fight

        Roach is trainer of the year because he knows how to pick which matches his fighters will look good in.

        Except, nearly all of them have lost recently with the exception of Pacquiao ... and even that's VERY debatable.

        This is why the damage control involved highlighting what burdens Roach must work with in an HBO documentary.

        The REAL greatest thing about Freddie Roach is the fact that he was a student of Eddie Futch.

        Everything else is average at best.
        i agree with this post.

        roach also does well because he knows which fighters will make him look good, eg khan.

        i think he thought he had struck gold with rigondeaux though but he basically did not have a clue how to work with him. not a clue. check the videos of their padwork together- EXACTLY the same as for pacquiao. now if ever there were two different fighters that's them two.

        what's the name of that kid from the wild card that boxed on the undercard of the rigondeaux fight this weekend?- i don't know how much he's worked with freddie but he's a typical wild card boxer, with the same strong points and the same shortcomings.

        roach is good but only when using very specific materials.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View Post
          I would honestly rather have Khan with someone like Manny Steward than Roach. All trainers are good fits for certain types of fighters. Roach and Khan don't fit.
          i don't think khan is intelligent enough to box the way steward would try to make him. he appears to have very little ring intelligence and variety. when throwing blistering combinations then jumping out of the way doesn't work he is stumped basically.
          i think if anything he has overachieved by being with roach. and that is the beauty of roach- he can make certain fighters overachieve big time, with a little cute matchmaking too of course. but it is important to work with a fighter's strengths as well so fair play, i just don't see 'great' as being quite appropiate.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by -Lowkey- View Post
            Its clear from this thread some people overrate Freddy Roach but on the other hand some people grossly underrate Freddy.

            To call the guy a "bum" is laughable the guy has given his life and his health to this sport he has had a lot of success and deserves respect he has done a lot for this sport.

            If a guy like Freddy Roach can be described as a "bum" what does that make a guy who takes time out of his day just to post **** on an internet forum about him?
            giving your life to something is admirable (the health bit we can and should sympathise about but it's not something to be commended and only serves to tarnish the image of boxing as a brutal sport without skill).
            however neither of these factors mean that someone deserves such recognition. i know a good number of boxers and coaches who have dedicated themselves to boxing but to all intents and purposes are bums. it's not a nice thing to say and i don't think it should be said but equally i don't see that they automatically qualify for a great level of status.

            (i appreciate you were just responding to the fact that someone called roach a bum and my post is not arguing with you with your opinion on that)

            Comment


            • #46
              VERY OVERRATED!

              Great LEGENDARY Trainers Build Fighters from the Ground Up, they don't just revive fighters career after they suffer a loss

              I have respect for Roach, no question he is a Good Trainer and a Hall of Fame Trainer but no ***in way he is "THE GREATEST TRAINER" and who ever think so clearly only been watching boxing for the last 2-3 years

              do your ***in homework on the sport you claim you love and stop listening to these BULL**** reports who are just as clueless as you are and is only Writing and Posting stuff you want to hear

              Boxing Writers Today are just as bad for the sport as the damn Greedy Promoters and the Spineless fighters who hide behind their Promoters

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by tredh View Post
                Yes but he still a good trainer
                ^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^^^

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Pretty Boy32 View Post
                  Done what?
                  Through better conditioning Khan has become quicker,
                  Khan won't learn anything new from Roach. He needs to work on his defense and his inside game and he won't learn that from Roach.

                  Alot of boxing writers though Khan should of went to Mayweather sr,
                  Although Khan's chin can't get any better his defense can...
                  Ariza has done a good job putting weight into Amir's legs, so when he gets hit he won't go down as easy but he can still be hurt.
                  He's obviously learnt a lot from Roach look at what level he is at.

                  Khan going to Mayweather Sr?

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    No more overrated then Roger and Floyd SR.

                    You do the math....

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by Dem Eyes View Post
                      He's obviously learnt a lot from Roach look at what level he is at.

                      Khan going to Mayweather Sr?

                      What level?????

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP