Just reading the thread about a Froch injury post-Abraham, where he talks about the dedication and actually listening to McCracken, his trainer, it got me thinking about a post I made the other day, where I said that Froch had got overconfident in his own abilities and that eventually cost him against Kessler. Looking at his two latest performances and the difference in his attitude especially, there's a significant change. I thought he looked like the better fighter against Kessler but wasn't active enough. He seemed to be fighting with the attitude that he couldn't lose and that hurt him a lot, probably ensuring he did lose the fight. Against Abraham, many people were saying he was about to get knocked out and, honestly, if you look how careless he was against Kessler, it's not that bad a prediction, even in hindsight. Abraham will always be a lethal puncher and Froch, against Kessler, was leaving himself wide open for punches that shouldn't have been coming close. He was lunging in, looking awkward and his activity was way down. I don't think it's an understatement to say the loss was coming. If he had got past Kessler, it may have been against Abraham. Had he got past Abraham, it may have been Johnson, it doesn't matter. What is significant though, is that, because of how overconfident he was, he set himself up for a fall. Luckily for him, he learned a lot from the loss and he came back a much better fighter. People will always look at the Abraham fight and say "Abraham did nothing, he's a bum" but that doesn't tell the whole story. Froch was excellent that night and outboxed Abraham better than Taylor or Dirrell did, and outfought him, which is something Miranda couldn't do. That was a truly special performance and if you were to list all the reason why he lost against Kessler, you could tick every one of those things off and say they weren't there against Abraham. He wasn't overconfident, he wasn't sloppy, he was active and so on. Obviously losing is always a negative but Froch gained a lot from it. He needed to realize that he could be beaten and he's a better fighter since losing. Anyway, go ahead :good
great example :good i think the obvious choice at this moment in time is Khan/Prescott. I'm also inclined to think Vitali's loss to Lewis changed a lot of peoples minds about Vitali's ''lack of heart'' Martinez losing to Williams got a lot of guys onto his bandwagon! He came out of that fight better than Williams, whos career really plummeted since I also love the quote regarding Frazier/Ali "The knockdown made Frazier a champion. Getting up made Ali a legend''
Louis vs Schmelling I: After this first loss, Joe Louis corrected his flaw and went on to a record for most consecutive HW title defenses which still stands to this day.
Why would you say Pacquiao/Morales I was a blessing in disguise for Pacquiao? Obviously he went on to become a much more well rounded fighter but wouldn't that have happened anyway? Just wondering. I like the pick of Lewis/McCall though. Good shout.
After the morales fight roach realised pac needed a right hand and it eventually helped him to become more well rounded and get greater wins. Thats when the second fight happened he had that right hand whenever morales stept to the left. It would have eventually happened but morales made clear what needed to be changed and added in pacs arsenal. Thats why I think the loss helped him a lot.:thumbsup
Lennox Lewis-Oliver McCall 1 was the first to come to mind. Lewis could be sloppy and leave himself really vulnerable when he threw that right hand. Manny Steward was the one who trained McCall that night and looked to expose this flaw. Steward then helped Lewis work out some of his flaws with balance, controlling range/tempo, and also Lewis didn't throw as many of those ugly, wild overhand rights as he did earlier.
Arguello's loss to Marcel showed Alexis that he needed to learn to box, and could not simply rely on his power to see him through. He went on to become one of the best classical boxer-punchers who ever graced a prize ring.