Carl Froch vs George Groves IBF SMW Title & Undercards Prediction Discussion Thread

[Rome-By-Ko]

I summarised but 3 of your points in the past 24 hours whereby people clearly undone your points and underlined your contradictions.

Adults go home and question why so many people whom have no reason or collusion, would do that...specifically to you and your various points.

You made up two of those points..So I your credibility is not doing well right now homie..

I'll give you the one from that Ward thread..I'll chalk that one up to poor wording..You points within this thread were untrue..

[Kris Silver]

It would depend on the rds were talking about..Carrying the pace is not a criteria, it's a description..One that actual judges use, out also has relevance..As I seen in how you score fights, it would be lost on you tho..When in a close Rd where fighters both have their moments you need to start looking at other things..Like who is making the fight, who is controlling the pace(aka who is controlling the fight), ring generalship..

One of the criteria you left out..In different rds Froch was the more active and cleaner puncher..I really thought outside of maybe 3 Rd there were a lot of close Rds..

Only 3 rounds which were clear for Groves?

Jesus god help us.

[Kris Silver]

You made up two of those points..So I your credibility is not doing well right now homie..

I'll give you the one from that Ward thread..I'll chalk that one up to poor wording..You points within this thread were untrue..

So your points are backed up even when clearly underlined to all as contractive.

And mine are 'untrue' even though you've ranted at Dirk about opinion not being fact.



That's seriously like the 5th contradiction now.

[Rome-By-Ko]

Ring Generalship was probably the criteria where Groves was most dominant

In every Rd,I really can't agree..I believe you said you could give Froch 3 Rds..There were a lot of close rds,I believe there were four rds..Guess this it's to far fetch..lmao..

[Rome-By-Ko]

So your points are backed up even when clearly underlined to all as contractive.

And mine are 'untrue' even though you've ranted at Dirk about opinion not being fact.



That's seriously like the 5th contradiction now.

Round 1 was close? With a KD.

Round 6 was a clear Groves round.

Jesus god help us.

I'm confused by both post, sorry??

[Dirk Diggler UK]

In every Rd,I really can't agree..I believe you said you could give Froch 3 Rds..There were a lot of close rds,I believe there were four rds..Guess this it's to far fetch..lmao..

I said if you were being generous you could give Froch 3 rounds. Very generous. So yes another round is far-fetched. Saying it was an even fight is just ridiculous.

Groves was pushing Froch back. He had control of the centre of the ring. Froch was hitting air with his jab most of the time because he was worried about what was coming back. They were fighting on Groves' terms for almost the entire fight.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Only 3 rounds which were clear for Groves?

Jesus god help us.

I don't know why I continually try to reason with this clown. I can't remember what fight it was - I think it was Bradley-Provodnikov

The round where Bradley was absolutely out on his feet and hurt. This guy scored the round for Bradley because he "carried the pace". Forget the fact that the guy was on ***** street. He carried that pace baby!

[Kris Silver]

I don't know why I continually try to reason with this clown. I can't remember what fight it was - I think it was Bradley-Provodnikov

The round where Bradley was absolutely out on his feet and hurt. This guy scored the round for Bradley because he "carried the pace". Forget the fact that the guy was on ***** street. He carried that pace baby!

I've given up. The only thing I can give him is I didn't make so much sense in my last post, but it's because I can feel myself getting ******er in this circus.

Can't reason with logic with fools so I'm done.

Else I'll need a pacemaker.

[Rome-By-Ko]

I said if you were being generous you could give Froch 3 rounds. Very generous. So yes another round is far-fetched. Saying it was an even fight is just ridiculous.

Groves was pushing Froch back. He had control of the centre of the ring. Froch was hitting air with his jab most of the time because he was worried about what was coming back. They were fighting on Groves' terms for almost the entire fight.

IMO, rds 2,5(I believe this it's the Rd) and 8 where Froch rds..2 and 8 I remember i thought were clear Froch Rd..I'll have to go back and see the fight out look at my card for the rest..If be more then happy to debate the rds I scored for Froch..I'm out right now, but when I get a chance we can do that..

[Rome-By-Ko]

I don't know why I continually try to reason with this clown. I can't remember what fight it was - I think it was Bradley-Provodnikov

The round where Bradley was absolutely out on his feet and hurt. This guy scored the round for Bradley because he "carried the pace". Forget the fact that the guy was on ***** street. He carried that pace baby!

Link with ya lies..

What i said was, you can make a case, not that I scored it for Bradley..The truth be told, Bradley was on his way to clearly winning that Rd before getting hurt..He also never stopped punching,so I believe a case can be made for him winning that Rd..Never said I scored it for him..Please don't miss quote me..