It was never going to live upto the hype, main event was not gonna match the 1st fight either. Overall though it was a good event good for boxing All stoppages too
How can anyone have voted yes? The question isn't "was it worth 16 quid?" or "did you think the event was crap?"... The question is "did it live up to the hype?". For that question you have to look at the main event where the hype was unparalleled. Aside from the magnitude of the event, the fight itself was technical, tactical, boring compared to the last - and boring compared to the undercard. Each round was pretty much pick'em with few power shots thrown. Were it not for fight 1 and this fight was fought in front of 2000 somewhere or other, you'd be saying it was dull.
Everyone got excited about it based on the first fight. It was nowhere near as good as the first fight, therefore it didn't live up to the hype. There has been and will be many better fights this year. Thank god for the knockout, saved the show imo.
Good fight but no it didn't. The hype suggested there would be more action. When you watch it back ask yourself, did that deserve to take place in front of 80k people?
To be fair Eubank's monocle was worth the 17 quid. I thought the fight was very cagey and there was little to choose between the fighters up to that stage. Great shot by Froch but I would be worried if he were to face GGG next.
There was never 80k people there. Touts lost £££. The punch was great. Froch delivered. George didn't.
The 'event' lived up to the hype. And the fight was close until the right hand, it was always interesting with moments of excitement.
I had £50 on Froch 6, 50 on Froch 7 and 50 on Froch 12. ****ing close. I felt cuts or late flurry, while behind on points. But Froch was clearly winning, and chinned him out.
It was over hyped and made out to be closer than it ever was, so no. They fight 10 times, CF wins 10 times.
There appeared that there was plenty of empty seats-where was those 80 thousand fans we heard about?:huh