Is Groves’ resurgence a boost to Froch’s legacy?

[kingofthieves]

168lb dust up+ reflection on Froch:

I was just thinking earlier that what a twist of fate it’s been that DeGale went from downplaying George groves in some of his post fight interviews, then goes ahead and loses and looks lackluster where he has to go back to the drawing board.

Meanwhile Eubank Jr. who was favored in his groves’ fight loses decisively.

This takes me back to the Groves vs. Froch fights. I felt groves was doing well in the 1st fight, stoppage was extremely premature although froch came on strong.

Froch wins decisively and emphatically in the rematch.

So now my main point and question:

Although I don’t put much into H2H (although I like the concept of comparing skills and traits of different fighters) who wins vs. who in different eras, I do believe a win over a fighter who goes on to do great things can boost one’s legacy.

In this case, do you feel Froch’s wins over groves look better and better?

Groves seeming to be the UK heir apparent of 168 with the dust settling and finding his stride, does this indirectly boost Froch’s legacy, stock, and value?

I personally feel like it does.

[SonnyboyReturns]

Groves embarrassing a bum over the weekend does nothing for Froch's legacy. If Groves avenged his loss to Jack it would boost Froch's win over groves. I say win because the first fight was a robbery so doesn't count. If Groves then went on to unify it make Froch's win look even better.

But some could still argue that Groves is a better fighter now then when Froch beat him and this version of Groves would beat Froch if he were to go back in time. I'm not saying I necessarily agree but you could make that argument.

[Sparked_26]

yeah it does.

putting the win closer to the Kessler win

[bluebeam]

it definitely makes froch resume look even better if groves wins the 168 tournament

[Shrap]

Nah. SMW is weak as hell at the moment. Froch has always been an obviously limited boxer and beating Groves certainly won't change that.

[Robbie Barrett]

Of course. The better the resume of a fighter, the better the resume of the fighter who beat him.

[b00g13man]

Most definitely.

[dan_cov]

I don't think so.
Who has he beaten? A load of middleweights not even ranked in the top 10 vast majority being domestic level.

[Kezzer]

I think it says more about the current generation. Frock was a awkward but entertaining fighter, and other than for ward who was clearly technically superb - he would have been the best In the division. Groves got fairly lucky with a early knockdown in the first fight and frock came back - whether you agreed with the stoppage or not - he ended in control and would likely have knocked groves out in many of opinions before the 12th bell. The second fight he was a class above and eventually got the knock out punch we all remember.

Groves is maybe the best of the current list? But he's hardly
Got the best record - it says it all about the others really doesn't it.

[alexguiness]

I think it says more about the current generation. Frock was a awkward but entertaining fighter, and other than for ward who was clearly technically superb - he would have been the best In the division. Groves got fairly lucky with a early knockdown in the first fight and frock came back - whether you agreed with the stoppage or not - he ended in control and would likely have knocked groves out in many of opinions before the 12th bell. The second fight he was a class above and eventually got the knock out punch we all remember.

Groves is maybe the best of the current list? But he's hardly
Got the best record - it says it all about the others really doesn't it.

You dont knock Froch over with luck.