Tweet
I am a big Froch fan, but Calzaghe was better P4P in my opinion.
-
-
I don't understand the notion of Froch not getting credit because he was losing the fight before he stopped him. What difference does that make?I actually thought Abraham would beat Froch via KO, I thought if it went the distance Froch would win but I envisaged him catching something big... He put on a master class, no one expected it.
Hindsight or not, the Taylor fight was a fight he was losing. I don't really think you can take too much credit for a fight that he was 4 pts down on (going off judges, don't have a score for that fight saved).
I do not disagree that Froch's resume is better than that of Conteh's & Winstone's. Again, it's what criteria you use for rankings.
Yea, you're telling me, my love for Froch comes from the fact that I've picked against him and every time, barring a couple, he's proved me wrong. An absolute warrior and credit to the sport, such a great character and fighter. I went absolutely nuts when I watched the Froch-Taylor fight on tape delay at midnight, half naked, jumping up and down with my bollocks whirling around.
What's the difference if he was winning before the KO or losing before the KO? He came from got off the floor, came from behind and knocked him out. He get's credit for that. It doesn't disspear because he was losing the fight.
I picked Abraham to win too, by KO or one sided decision.
I picked Froch to lose every fight he's had since Pascal including Pascal except his last 2 fights.
That Taylor fight was an amazing comeback, well and truely. I watched it the next day actually. Very rarely do I do that.
I remember being pissed off more than anything because I wanted Froch to lose.Comment
-
Who cares about British boxing.
It's like the minor leagues over there.Comment
-
He gets credit for the comeback, a helluva lotta praise for that man and it wasn't like he was being severely outclassed either. However, given 20 more seconds he would've picked up his first loss. He does get some credit but I feel it should be mentioned it was a fight he was losing. Credit doesn't disappear but definitely diminishes.
Why couldn't he be 25, not 35. 4 more big fights left in him, I need to get to one of them at least.Comment
-
I like Froch, I really do but my ranking of British fighters in recent times goes: Calzaghe, Lewis, Eubank, Hatton, Naz and then Froch.Comment
-
Even with a 10-7 round Froch would still have lost the fight on points. Taylor was ahead by 106-102 on two of the scorecards, do the maths. All he had to do was remain standing to hear the final bell to win.
And you are a biased fanboy as evidenced by your arse-licking comments and Carl Froch avatar.Comment
-
I don't see the relevance behind the fact if the fight went on for another 20 seconds that he'd have lost. It didn't go on another 20 seconds because he knocked him out by beating the **** out of him for a good 2 constant minutes.
All that matters is he won the fight. Losing or not.
You should try. You should have gone to Froch-Kessler fight.
I've been to plenty of fights in the UK. Massive fights, Arguello-Watt, Benn-Eubank 1, etc and Froch-Kessler 2 was definitely up there with them i regards to atmosphere and crowd.Comment
-
I should think myself lucky that I live in this country, if I were residing in America I don't think I'd travel over here just for the atmosphere. Extremely jealous you were old enough to not only live* the Benn era but attend one of those fights too.
What are your thoughts on Michael Watson?
___________
I can't argue with you, what happened, happened and the angle I'm coming from is ifs and buts. Do you look upon Golota-Bowe the same way?
*I was alive then, just not old enough to wipe my arse let alone appreciate such a magnificent fight.Comment
Comment