Comments Thread For: Carl Froch: Damn Right I'm Ready To Retire!

[dan_cov]

Geale never made it to the top he was just a titlist in the weakest MW division in history with wins over a 40yr old Mundine, a 40yr old shot to bits Sturm.
His reign in said weak era didn't even last 5 minutes he lost to Barker and got KTFO by GGG.

[New England]

Froch is likely a first ballot HOF. Is Geale?

i really hope that he doesn't get in at all, but it would be particularly embarrassing to see froch get in on the first ballot.

[IronDanHamza]

The comparison isn't necessarily their skill-sets. The comparison is that both guys were top fighters in a bad division. Geale made it to the top of the division, yet he was an average fighter. But the fact that he was a top fighter still made him a good win.

Froch made it to the top of the division being an average fighter, and the guys he beat at the top were good wins because they were "top fighters," but as I've said multiple times... many of those guys simply weren't very good. GOOD wins, yes, because they were top fighters in the division.


Take away Froch's resume against not-so-good TOP fighters and what do you have? A tough guy who likes to brawl. (IMO)

The comparisons terrible.

Geales barely even a top fighter in a terrible MW division he's 5-10.

He lacks skills, and also lacks all those other attributes.

Basically, it's a awful comparison.

[fanofboxing101]

Move up, fight Kovalev! Then retire. No Froch is not a HOF!
This guy is just decent! To easy to be great now days.

[bojangles1987]

Froch may not be technically sound, but his timing and anticipation is top notch. It's why he's able to have so much success despite his lack of fundamentals and relatively slow hands. He has a well-developed understanding of when to throw what punches, and what punches are coming in return.

[Tom Cruise]

By your logic what even makes Pascal good? He lost to an overrated Froch, lost to a 50yr old blown up middleweight who never beat anyone good at LHW and beat nobody but glass-chinned Dawson so what makes him so good and better than a Kessler and the likes?

Exactly. Does anyone ever have a good resume when you break it down like that?

Foreman was very green when Ali beat him, Frazier was clearly overrated and Ali went life and death with him over 3 fights, Liston was well past it, Norton was only rated highly because he beat Ali.

Alis resume is overrated. All these guys are only rated highly because they were beating each other.

[Tom Cruise]

Froch may not be technically sound, but his timing and anticipation is top notch. It's why he's able to have so much success despite his lack of fundamentals and relatively slow hands. He has a well-developed understanding of when to throw what punches, and what punches are coming in return.

This is true. He regularly traps opponents in his punching range and goes to town punching in combination to body and head.

He also has the ability to generate good power from unconventional angles.

His jab is good technically, but he makes it great (within this SMW era context) by using the **** out of it and having long arms.

Obviously he lacks in a lot of areas, but that is covered by his insane stamina, chin, heart and calmness (massively underrated asset of Froch's, have we ever seen him flustered?)

[Tom Cruise]

i really hope that he doesn't get in at all, but it would be particularly embarrassing to see froch get in on the first ballot.

If he gets in it will be on the 'Gatti' rule. But i agree he probably shouldnt get in without a few more wins (that i doubt he will get)

[IronDanHamza]

If he gets in it will be on the 'Gatti' rule. But i agree he probably shouldnt get in without a few more wins (that i doubt he will get)

Definitely more deserved than Gatti.

More deserved than many in there; Calzaghe, Too Sharp Johnson, Tszyu, McGuigan, Chalkey Wright, Pastrano, the list goes on.

I know "if he's in, he should be in" is ****** logic but comparing Froch to Gatti isn't right IMO.

[Tom Cruise]

Definitely more deserved than Gatti.

More deserved than many in there; Calzaghe, Too Sharp Johnson, Tszyu, McGuigan, Chalkey Wright, Pastrano, the list goes on.

I know "if he's in, he should be in" is ****** logic but comparing Froch to Gatti isn't right IMO.

I meant the Gatti rule (a term im now coining). As in he could get in because he was crazy popular, in great fights and captured the publics imagination, but not necessarily because of his resume or skills.

Im in no way comparing Froch to Gatti as a fighter lol