Carl Froch V Ritchie Woodhall

A tough fight against a prime Woodhall, underrated fighter was Richie.

 

Ritchie Woodhall was average, even worse as a pundit. Froch wins every round or the ref stops it.

 

:-(

 

Ha. Just my opinion. Might win a few rounds actually but far too chinny and lacked power.

 

The reason he was chinny was weight draining, if this was the Richie that fought Sugar Boy then Froch would been in for a extremely hard night. Richie was very classy.

 

Richie had enough movement and smarts to eek out a points win. He may have to cling like a limpet in the last few rounds but he wouldn't have had too much trouble finding a home for his right hand against Froch

 

As long as woodhall woooooorks that jab, he'll be fine

 

Woodhall would've outfoxed Froch in a battle of jabs. However if Froch turned it into a war, I know where my money would be..

 

I think Woodhall would just about hang on to clinch a verdict.

Woodhall was a pretty good operator I feel, though he never quite replicated his amateur form in the pros.

Neither is a particularly good matchup for the other, Froch obviously struggles with skilled boxers, and is at his best against those that try to be too clever - I think Woodhall would know what he could and couldn't get away with here.

Woodhall meanwhile would take the early rounds as Froch establishes a bit of rhythm, and then come under an onslaught late in the fight.

With a British ref Carl might just pull it out, but it'd be another Taylor type job I feel.

 

Didn't watch much of Woodhall exept for his amateur fight with RJJ and a couple others, rate him as a pundit though!

 

I think Froch would have worn him down and stopped him late!!!

 

Woodhall was a good fighter, solid amateur pedigree as well but I'd back Froch to break him down and stop him.

 

Froch catches up to him

 

richie would behing the jab, work off the jab, use the jab to set up atacks jab jab jab jab jab