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

[LacedUp]

I'm talking scoring, you claimed it to be a robbery which is not true..Not to mention the points taken from Khan was totally justified..Once again, it was a result you did not agree with, therefor it was a robbery lmao..

Oh no... oh no... you did not just say that.

Based on that, how many points did Froch deserve to have been deducted on saturday?

[LacedUp]

Right, and groves took no punishment..Froch was outboxed, and nobody knows how to score except you..Sounds about right..

Not!!!!

Oh God, please stop it. You're being silly. I think you'll find that about 99/100 agree with me over your "4-4" scorecard.

Me being biased has nothing to do with the punishment Groves took which is very clear to see.

Being "marked up abit" and his face after Froch is two different levels. Yeah fair skinned people tend to bruise easier but they don't bruise to that extent unless they've shipped a lot of shots and you don't have to be dropped or hurt to take punishment either.

Being biased is saying he took no punishment at all and won 7 out of the 8 first rounds.

It just wasn't punishment. He took some good blows, but most of the stuff Carl was throwing didn't even land. He hardly landed a jab all night and caught groves up close with a couple of flurries.

Froch took punishment. Worse than Groves.

Agree or disagree?

[Rome-By-Ko]

Oh no... oh no... you did not just say that.

Based on that, how many points did Froch deserve to have been deducted on saturday?

How many did Groves deserve?? Go have a look at Webbler sig..

[LacedUp]

1 warning vs 4? lol.

Yeah he rabbit punched him. Carl was butting, elbowing, hitting on the break (multiple times)....

[Rome-By-Ko]

Oh God, please stop it. You're being silly. I think you'll find that about 99/100 agree with me over your "4-4" scorecard.



It just wasn't punishment. He took some good blows, but most of the stuff Carl was throwing didn't even land. He hardly landed a jab all night and caught groves up close with a couple of flurries.

Froch took punishment. Worse than Groves.

Agree or disagree?

By the count within this thread already proves you wrong..Had you have been right with your count tho, does that make me wrong?? Or does it just means my opinion is different??I really don't understand why people are scared or take issues with a different opinion..I myself welcome them..

By the way only cowards look for confirmation from others..

[IronDanHamza]

Oh God, please stop it. You're being silly. I think you'll find that about 99/100 agree with me over your "4-4" scorecard.



It just wasn't punishment. He took some good blows, but most of the stuff Carl was throwing didn't even land. He hardly landed a jab all night and caught groves up close with a couple of flurries.

Froch took punishment. Worse than Groves.

Agree or disagree?

Of course Froch took more punishment than Groves. Doesn't mean Groves didn't take his share. Both took a lot of punches and plenty of punishment.

Groves still look plenty. Froch might have missed a lot of punches he also landed plenty of punches and his face showed it. By the time it was stopped his face was a mess, to a state that's not possible no matter how easily you bruise unless you've taken plenty of punches. After the fight at the press conference just from hearing him speak you could tell he'd taken plenty of hard punches.

Denying it is ridiculous to me. Groves might have been winning the fight but it's not like a Mayweather-Canelo situation like you and others are making out where Groves barely had a glove landed on him, he took a lot of punches and was breaking down fast.

[LacedUp]

By the count within this thread already proves you wrong..Had you have been right with your count tho, does that make wrong?? Or does out just means my opinion is different??I really don't understand why people are scared or take issues with a different opinion..I myself welcome them..

By the way only cowards look for confirmation from others..

lol mate.

If 99 out of 100 people think you're an idiot, you probably are. I couldn't care less about this count, because people are biased for Froch. It's as simple as that. and so are you.

You are welcome to have an opinion. I also thought Haye beat Wlad.

That doesn't make it right though.

[Rome-By-Ko]

1 warning vs 4? lol.

Yeah he rabbit punched him. Carl was butting, elbowing, hitting on the break (multiple times)....

Most of not all the butting was done by groves..Coming in with his head down..I took no issue overall with the rough housing tho, that's where the fight went and both were guilty of it..

[Rome-By-Ko]

lol mate.

If 99 out of 100 people think you're an idiot, you probably are. I couldn't care less about this count, because people are biased for Froch. It's as simple as that. and so are you.

You are welcome to have an opinion. I also thought Haye beat Wlad.

That doesn't make it right though.

If you really believe that Haye beat Wlad then it's right to you..Won't change the official result, but if you really believe that stand by it..

Oh btw, you saying people who seen a close fight for Froch have to be bias is another cowardly and sucker azz move..It seems to me everyone has giving valid reason as to why they seen a close fight..Your just choosing to not except them..It's your right, but why attack someone character?? Just cause their view differs from your own??

[Kris Silver]

A summary of Rome-by-KO over the past 24 hours:

Rome-by-KO:If you believe there's lots of match fixing, don't watch the sport.
Me: Then why in the face of proven boxing scandals, do you watch boxing?

Rome-by-KO:You scored for Groves widely because it suites your interests.
Dirk: I support Froch.

Rome-by-KO:Froch didn't deserve any point deductions.
Laced Up:Yet you say Khan deserved his for doing less of the same.


Keep going, this is deeply embarassing and entertaining for the general public.