Comments Thread For: George Groves: James DeGale's Value Has Diminished Significantly

[Yaconcha]

And that would spell "back to being knocked out" after his post-Froch / post-Jack renaissance.

Let's keep things real. Groves did beat DeGale (narrowly), but after having been stretched by Froch and outpointed by Jack, he won a title against a second tier like Chudinov and defended it against a hype job last Saturday.

So you just don’t like George Groves. But don’t beat the man down when he’s clearly climbing back up! I picked Eubank to beat him, neither man is maybe top drawer at the moment but one thing is certain, Eubank was completely not himself and the saint took full advantage. Fair play to him.
Degayle on the other hand (who I suspect is your man) has pretty much fallen into obscurity so deal with it.:bukkake:

[Tatabanya]

So you just don’t like George Groves. But don’t beat the man down when he’s clearly climbing back up! I picked Eubank to beat him, neither man is maybe top drawer at the moment but one thing is certain, Eubank was completely not himself and the saint took full advantage. Fair play to him.
Degayle on the other hand (who I suspect is your man) has pretty much fallen into obscurity so deal with it.:bukkake:

No, no my friend, you totally missed the point here. I'm just being objective.

Of the three, Groves is actually the one I prefer in terms of personality; DeGale and Eubank are not exactly of my liking.

But I think that Groves "climbed back" exclusively by fighting second level fighters. You can't call Chudinov, poor Gutknecht and Eubank Jr a who's who of greats. I'll believe in Groves' higher value if he defeats someone at the very top. As of now I believe that Benavidez would beat him bad. I could be wrong, but that's my feeling.

On the other hand, DeGale had struggled mightily with Jack already, but Truax really exposed him.

Eubank is a hype job, full stop.

[Yaconcha]

No, no my friend, you totally missed the point here. I'm just being objective.

Of the three, Groves is actually the one I prefer in terms of personality; DeGale and Eubank are not exactly of my liking.

But I think that Groves "climbed back" exclusively by fighting second level fighters. You can't call Chudinov, poor Gutknecht and Eubank Jr a who's who of greats. I'll believe in Groves' higher value if he defeats someone at the very top. As of now I believe that Benavidez would beat him bad. I could be wrong, but that's my feeling.

On the other hand, DeGale had struggled mightily with Jack already, but Truax really exposed him.

Eubank is a hype job, full stop.

I disagree, to be fair to others who have waited for a shot then, when someone makes a challenge and loses he should fall back in the line and wait his turn by climbing back.
Eubank jnr lost a very close decision to saunders and yes, most of the fringe world level fighters would look good against these “other guys” that’s what fight promotion is all about. They can all look good and actually look even better against an upper tier fighter. Look at groves froch first fight...
Tphe saint did far better than expected based on his previous so it kinda negates some of what you say regarding lesser fighters. Another example, truax was 100/1 underdog and beat degayle soundly in my view and yet same with degayle, he beat other fringe guys and looked good doing it.
When they say styles make fights that’s only part of it.
Go way back, cooper vs Ali first fight, Tyson vs Douglas (the long count II) honeygan vs curry etc etc.
My point is, our opinions are never truly accurate, we’re just guessing based on the ability of whoever and who they have fought, history more often than not proves us wrong and in the case of George Groves vs Chris Eubank jnr, yes the saint won but Chris Eubank (at whatever level you may think he is) is a better fighter than he showed full stop.

[Tatabanya]

Chris Eubank (at whatever level you may think he is) is a better fighter than he showed full stop.

Only time will tell. As of now, at 28, it doesn't look good for him. The way I see it he will probably be remembered at the same level of, say, Chris Pyatt.

But you're right in regard to opinions exclusively based on individual perception, and about "styles make fights"; it may be a commonplace, but it is a correct commonplace more often than not.

[tokon]

Degale definitely needs that rematch and needs to win it well. Shouldn't be talking about Eubank or anybody till he's redeemed himself.

The flaws in Degale have been evident for some time imo.

Groves is correct in that the value in a fight with Degale has seriously diminished unless Degale re-establishes himself in spectacular fashion.

[techliam]

No, no my friend, you totally missed the point here. I'm just being objective.

Of the three, Groves is actually the one I prefer in terms of personality; DeGale and Eubank are not exactly of my liking.

But I think that Groves "climbed back" exclusively by fighting second level fighters. You can't call Chudinov, poor Gutknecht and Eubank Jr a who's who of greats. I'll believe in Groves' higher value if he defeats someone at the very top. As of now I believe that Benavidez would beat him bad. I could be wrong, but that's my feeling.

On the other hand, DeGale had struggled mightily with Jack already, but Truax really exposed him.

Eubank is a hype job, full stop.

Who exactly has Benevidez beat to give you such confidence?

You talk of second level fighters, but Benevidez doesn’t even have third level fighters on his resume..

[Tatabanya]

Who exactly has Benevidez beat to give you such confidence?

You talk of second level fighters, but Benevidez doesn’t even have third level fighters on his resume..

The power he has would be enough; his attitude is the attitude of a fighter who "has it", if you get my point.

Groves is a good fighter; Benavidez (my opinion) will be going to the next level quite soon.

[techliam]

The power he has would be enough; his attitude is the attitude of a fighter who "has it", if you get my point.

Groves is a good fighter; Benavidez (my opinion) will be going to the next level quite soon.

Your hopes for a fighter become irrelevant once you start applying different criteria for others. To you, 'I'll believe in Groves' higher value if he defeats someone at the very top', but Benavidez gets a pass because you like him.

Give me a break.. Benavidez shouldn't even be part of your discussion until he fits your criteria.

[Tatabanya]

Your hopes for a fighter become irrelevant once you start applying different criteria for others. To you, 'I'll believe in Groves' higher value if he defeats someone at the very top', but Benavidez gets a pass because you like him.

Give me a break.. Benavidez shouldn't even be part of your discussion until he fits your criteria.

Sometimes intuition can be enough. It can backfire, though - I'll grant you that. When I saw Manny Pacquiao for the first time he was a complete unknown, yet I saw enough in him to pick him against Lehlo Ledwaba (who at that time was touted as a soon-to-be great). In fact, look what happened.

Again, I'm not talking exact science here. My gut feeling is that Benavidez might turn out to be a special fighter. But I'll be the first to admit that I was wrong if that doesn't happen.

To summarize my opinion: Groves has already proven his level (which, to me, is a B+ level); Benavidez has the potential for A level, and I'm quite confident that he will reach it.

[Yaconcha]

Only time will tell. As of now, at 28, it doesn't look good for him. The way I see it he will probably be remembered at the same level of, say, Chris Pyatt.

But you're right in regard to opinions exclusively based on individual perception, and about "styles make fights"; it may be a commonplace, but it is a correct commonplace more often than not.

the same Chris Pratt that beat Steve Collins?