Froch v Hopkins

As i thought.

Full of ****.

Nothing but opinion and a hatred of Froch.

 

Stop swinging off his balls you imbecile.

I don't hate Froch just because I believe a superior fighter in Hopkins would beat him.

I also believe there are numerous fighters in the past at 168 who would beat him.

This is a boxing forum it's for boxing discussion and opinions, if you don't like it I suggest you go to Frochs website because there may be a forum there that you can ****suck on.

 

Try not to be a condescending *****.

I was here years before you and your opinion, was never Frochs biggest fan, but always an admirer.

Having proven himself at the top level i'm now a big fan.

I said he'd KO Groves had the first fight continued, and picked him to KO Groves in the rematch after using his jab to control the early rounds.

What was your prediction ****ybollox ?

 

oh bloody hell I've been on here since 2004, just wanted a new start anyhow.

Froch is a quality fighter, one of Britains greatest, but that doesn't mean I have to drain his sack just because I think that.

He is a very good fighter, HOF bound but let's be real he went life and death with Taylor, had a titanic struggle with Dirrell, lost to Kessler, got schooled off Ward, barely beat shop worn Kessler in the rematch, was lucky in the Groves fight and whilst the finish in the rematch was spectacular the fight was even going into the 8th.

The man is not unbeatable. This is fact not hate.

And for your info I had Froch beating Groves both times. But I thought Groves would cause him problems due to his style in which it did.

 

He was losing to Taylor for 6 rounds, its a ****in myth that he was losing everything until the last 30 seconds, go check how the American commentary team had the fight until the finish.

Groves was nothing more than an awkward prospect, Froch was too confident and paid the price first time around, in the rematch he controlled the distance and upped the anti in the 5th, which ultimately lead to the stoppage in the 8th.

Now please show me where it was that you predicted that froch would stop groves ?

 

If he hadn't of stopped Taylor in the 12th he would have lost the fight 106-102 on 2 cards going into the final round. It is irrelevant how the US judges had it scored.

The first Groves fight was a war, great comeback by Carl. But the rematch was close going into the 8th it was 66-67 x 2 in favour of Froch and 68-65 in favour of Groves, hardly a schooling.

And I can't recall posting online my prediction of the fight. Although your welcome to search through my posting history if your that desperate Lee.

 

The judges in the Taylor fight were way wide of the mark (close fight with taylor winning the 3rd 10-8 )

The judges in the Groves fight were equally wide of the mark ( Groves was at least 3 or 4 points ahead prior to the stoppage )

My prediction for the first fight was ..... Groves will probably win the early rounds, and may even hurt Froch ( didn't think he'd drop him ) but at some point Frochs experience and pedigree will take over and he'll administer the coup de grace.

Don't let hatred cloud your views.

 

Some people are blind fan boy idiots though to be fair

 

People going on about the age of Hopkins... he is still world class, and I don't see any reason to think he has declined since the Calzaghe fight. I think Froch would be the underdog in the fight.

As for fights to improve Froch's legacy, OK Ward, but also Hopkins or Golovkin would be good names. DeGale could be a good name, depending on what he goes on to do.

 

Regarding Calzaghe, I'm not sure either fighter deserved it. Terrible fight.

 

Carl should fight Chavez, I think Hopkins would be a bad match up for Carl a fight he could lose. B-Hop has the style and the chin to make Froch look bad, Hopkins can make great fighter look terrible.

 

I would be interested in watching it but I don't think it is worth it for Froch from a risk vs reward point of view.

 

ur a grade A puff terry what u doing posting this atsch

 

Nope. Simple as that. Not interested.