Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-28-2012, 01:55 PM   #16
Little Tyson
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,636
vCash: 1284
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Of course Nigel Benn how dare you say that someone from the modern era would beat someone who used to fight.

Infact, I would go for Thulani Malinga to beat Carl Froch.




Of course not, It would be a close fight but I think Froch runs out the victor due to non stopping pressure.
Little Tyson is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 05-28-2012, 02:16 PM   #17
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Sumbu Kalambay

"would not lose a round"

against Carl Froch. He would bamboozle him. "Despite Froch being the bigger man."
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:17 PM   #18
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Tyson View Post
Of course Nigel Benn how dare you say that someone from the modern era would beat someone who used to fight.

Infact, I would go for Thulani Malinga to beat Carl Froch.




Of course not, It would be a close fight but I think Froch runs out the victor due to non stopping pressure.
Picked the wrong guy. Malinga was very tough, and a very capable operator who fought a lot of good fighters. He sounded the shittest so you picked on him, but that was also a solid era.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:19 PM   #19
Little Tyson
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,636
vCash: 1284
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flea Man View Post
Picked the wrong guy. Malinga was very tough, and a very capable operator who fought a lot of good fighters. He sounded the shittest so you picked on him, but that was also a solid era.
No its because Froch would have actually beaten him.
Little Tyson is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:20 PM   #20
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Kessler did not box Froch. He made it a fight. Benn became more rounded at 168, and still hit hard enough that he wasn't a feather fist.

Froch will stun him at points and back him up, and Benn would throw back, with more vigour than Bute.

This is a close fight. Neither man had much in the way of defence but Benn was more fluid with his output whereas Froch is awkward.

Benn will land the cleaner, more eye catching work here. This isn't Arthur Abraham. But Froch can mix his approach as well as up the tempo, so it's a guaranteed exciting fight and a pick 'em on the cards.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:21 PM   #21
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Tyson View Post
No its because Froch would have actually beaten him.
How would Froch approach Malinga, stylistically?
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:23 PM   #22
Little Tyson
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,636
vCash: 1284
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flea Man View Post
How would Froch approach Malinga, stylistically?
Would aim for a points victory, not knocking that hard bastard out.
Little Tyson is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:26 PM   #23
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Malinga had a brilliant jab. He beat Benn with little worries first time round IMO. He could go on the backfoot and was extremely durable.

I can't help but think of Froch falling short and getting so ragged with his output like he did against Dirrell.

I just think it would be wrong to use 'Sugarboy' as the benchmark for Froch's supposed superiority over what was a quality era. He was inconsisent, but was known to put in very solid performances, and arguable wins, over the 'Elite' of his day as well.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:35 PM   #24
widdy
lancs,where real men live
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: ,burnleylancashire
Posts: 2,878
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Tyson View Post
Of course Nigel Benn how dare you say that someone from the modern era would beat someone who used to fight.

Infact, I would go for Thulani Malinga to beat Carl Froch.




Of course not, It would be a close fight but I think Froch runs out the victor due to non stopping pressure.
**** me how old are you,proper spat your dummy out of the pram then

benn was a powerfull man at 168 and below,he stopped blokes at each weight how any ****er can say he didnt or was chinny is beyond my meagre brain cell gotta be a ****ing troll
froch is one of my fave fighters,tough ****er,no ***** ****ing about,just like benn was in the 80s and 90s,but froch has not the power or upper body movement of benn,and bute was no ****ing nigle benn,not by a long way,benn would of done a job on bute,just like froch,prob quicker
widdy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:37 PM   #25
ApatheticLeader
is bringing ***y back.
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: "Yo gangsta! Let's get ready to gang bang"!
Posts: 5,390
vCash: 187
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by nosebuster View Post
Froch got dropped by jermain taylor...........nigel benn surely punches harder than him........
Actually, probably not, although it's difficult to compare at 168, as Taylor exclusively fought top competition as far as I remember at that weight.

Benn, meanwhile, fought average - good fighters in the main.

EDIT: No, I take that back. Benn was a harder puncher than Taylor at 168. And Froch did get knocked down - he got caught loads due to his inexperience at that level and Taylor's superior technical ability.

Benn doesn't have the technical ability, speed or ring generalship of Taylor. He does have similar stamina though.
ApatheticLeader is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:38 PM   #26
ApatheticLeader
is bringing ***y back.
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: "Yo gangsta! Let's get ready to gang bang"!
Posts: 5,390
vCash: 187
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by finley View Post
I rest my case. Just watch.

I bet back in the day his mirror would shit itself when he looked at it. The guy was that scary.


[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
The vast majority of that footage was at 160 - it bore no resemblance to the 168 Benn.
ApatheticLeader is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:39 PM   #27
ApatheticLeader
is bringing ***y back.
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: "Yo gangsta! Let's get ready to gang bang"!
Posts: 5,390
vCash: 187
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flea Man View Post
Sumbu Kalambay

"would not lose a round"

against Carl Froch. He would bamboozle him. "Despite Froch being the bigger man."
He'd lose a few. Was a better fighter than Froch though.
ApatheticLeader is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:45 PM   #28
ApatheticLeader
is bringing ***y back.
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: "Yo gangsta! Let's get ready to gang bang"!
Posts: 5,390
vCash: 187
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

[quote=widdy;12948640]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticLeader View Post
I've got to tell you, he REALLY didn't look that hard dropping to the ground against Watson.

The way he went down was rather amusing.

I'm not comparing Watson to Froch, as they couldn't be more different. Just pointing out that Benn in boxing terms wasn't so 'hard'.[/Q

Did I say anything incorrect?

No. As usual.
ApatheticLeader is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:46 PM   #29
kurt2006
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,976
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

At 160 Benn was a monster puncher. Did not quite pack the same power at 168.
kurt2006 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2012, 02:49 PM   #30
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: Carl Froch V Nigel Benn

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticLeader View Post
Actually, probably not, although it's difficult to compare at 168, as Taylor exclusively fought top competition as far as I remember at that weight.

Benn, meanwhile, fought average - good fighters in the main.

EDIT: No, I take that back. Benn was a harder puncher than Taylor at 168. And Froch did get knocked down - he got caught loads due to his inexperience at that level and Taylor's superior technical ability.

Benn doesn't have the technical ability, speed or ring generalship of Taylor. He does have similar stamina though.
Outside of Wharton and a few others, Benn got rid of a few guys at super middle, even if he wasn't a humongous hitter at the weight.

It also has to be said Benn was hitting some of the best chins of that era up at 168 as well. Not too many of the more devastating hitters in this range I'd pick to stop Eubank, Collins, Malinga, McClellan. And if he wasn't injured I don't think Benn would've stopped Gerald either.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013