Comments Thread For: Naseem Hamed: Carl Froch is Shot and He Should Retire

[uncommon]

It may be early too early yet to tell; though Froch's concrete chin may have a few hairlines? We'll all know soon enough.

[hitking]

That's a hard one to back up. Ward is better but Froch has done his time and fought the fights he had to.

Froch is a solid fighter that overachieved. And he should be applauded for that. But his fanbase act as if this guy is an elite fighter and ATG. And that is absolutely ridiculous.

[Hitman932]

The fact that Hamed says he should be like Sugar Ray Leonard is hilarious.

Leonard should have retired after Duran III instead he took over a year off - came back - got beaten down by Terry Norris.

Then he retired, took six years off, then returned at 41 years old, half blind, to get knocked out by Camacho.

Good example Naz.

[-Kev-]

I saw absolutely no difference from the Froch who fought Taylor and Dirrell vs the Froch who fought Groves. Froch is the same exact fighter he was in 2009. Still the same fighter who comes on strong with his really good stamina, chin and activity in fights. Really, the only thing that happened in Groves fight that was different was the terribly premature stoppage. But even with the controversy, it is a fact that Froch was coming on strong just like he did against Taylor, and he was getting outboxed just like Dirrell was doing to him. Whether or not he would have stopped Groves had the ref not stopped the fight is up for debate, but he looked very strong and hungry for the win at that point, and that is not a sign of a shot fighter.

[Hitman932]

I saw absolutely no difference from the Froch who fought Taylor and Dirrell vs the Froch who fought Groves. Froch is the same exact fighter he was in 2009. Still the same fighter who comes on strong with his really good stamina, chin and activity in fights. Really, the only thing that happened in Groves fight that was different was the terribly premature stoppage. But even with the controversy, it is a fact that Froch was coming on strong just like he did against Taylor, and he was getting outboxed just like Dirrell was doing to him. Whether or not he would have stopped Groves had the ref not stopped the fight is up for debate, but he looked very strong and hungry for the win at that point, and that is not a sign of a shot fighter.

I gotta agree with you. I think the only thing that has happened since 2009 is that people have started to perceive Froch as being a better boxer than he actually is.

He is a fighter who wears down opponents and wins fights on will and determination. Guys like that are often fighting from behind - especially against guys whose only gameplan is to pick up the early rounds and then hope to box and stay away for 12.

[boxrec]

How come Froch is shot?? How come there isn't ENORMOUS credit givin to Groves?? Froch is a beast and very very good but certain styles will ALWAYS give even great fighters problems and GEOVES is very good. I hate all the talk that Froch is shot. BJ FLORES

[Nomadic]

Funny coming from a boxer calling himself a prince. Froch is a KING Cobra.

[sdcluser]

Naz knows best.

"I taught everything Naz knows as he is my son"

-Pappa Barrera

[rzagza]

Keep eating, Naseem. Pretty soon your chin will hit you in the balls.

[Yaconcha]

MIB 2.
will smith, "hes a ball chinian" lol