Break Down Glen Johnson Vs Carl Froch.... Who Wins!

Are you saying Glen Johnson has been robbed 8 times? He has been in a number of close fights, but several of his losses where deserved. There is no debating that.

If you perform poorly, well below your perceived skill level, against b-level opponents, then fights are going to be close, and if they are close there is a good chance you will lose. If Johnson, cleary a skilled professional who should be beating fighters like Harmon and Branco, let's these fighters impose their styles and fight to close fights with him, then he is going to lose. There is no denying Johnson could, and should beaten fighters of this calibre, yet he hasn't. He has let fights like this go against him.

I'm not saying Johnson is a b-level fighter, I'm just saying he has lost to several b-level fighters. A lot of people are basing their prediction on Johnson beating Cloud, Green Tarver etc, but ignoring Johnsons fights with b-level fighters that he has ultimately lost. And I'm stressing that Johnson, although putting in some very good performances at the top level, has not performed consistently at the top level. So whenever someone bases a prediction on his wins, they should consider his losses aswell. He has lost at the top level more than he has won.

Anyway, I agree with your prediction :good.

 

If you were to look back over the post history, you would see that for the last 3 years a handful of posters on ESB said that a tall, heavy-handed, boxer/puncher with a modicum of skill would be a stylistic nightmare for Arthur Abraham. In the Froch/Abraham fight we saw clearly that those posters were correct.

Glen Johnson is not Arthur Abraham. Johnson has fought every style, and every level of fighter you can imagine, and he has done his thing all over the world. Prior to the start of the S6 Abraham was an over-protected paper titlist who fought mostly club level fighters in Germany.

Froch put on a clinic against Abraham, but once again, if you check the post history, you'll notice a number of posters say, "this is how you beat AA," and go on to describe the Froch/Abraham fight YEARS AGO

It won't be so easy for Froch to "put on a clinic" with The Road Warrior in his face all night long. I expect a hell of a fight. Possibley the best fight of the tourney.

 

I like this fight. I think its gonna be very close. Johnson will put pressure, pressure and more pressure on Froch. I expect Froch will box him rather than try and slug it out. I think it will look a lot more like the Kessler fight than the AA fight. But I expect Froch to get a close decision, having been rocked and clocked a few times.

 

Interesting fight..

I think it could be a very scrappy gritty and close fight, probably Carl wins on points but closer than some might think

 

Now remember...Froch outboxed King Arthur NOT Andre Dirrell. This is a good fight for Glen @SMW.

 

The decisions either "were may be of a controversial nature" or he deserved to lose. You can't have it both ways. IF he deserved to lose then the decision were NOT controversial.

"Lets those fighters impose their styles on him"? You make it sound like he stood around and just took punches without fighting back.

And I am guessing that you saying Johson beating Cloud was a typo.

 

What? I believe Johnson lost some of those fights, but some believe that he deserved the nod. Jan Zaveck clearly beat his latest opponent Rafael Jackiewicz, yet that fight was a Majority decision in favour of Zaveck. Even a blindman could see that Zaveck won, but the scoring was controversial.

Johnson has overcome styles more challenging than the likes of Branco and Omar Sheika, who both have quite basic styles and do not excell in any given area. Both have basic attributes. If Johnson can beat Tarver, who has a difficult, rangy southpaw style, why can't he beat a basic fighter like Branco or Sheika?

:huh

 

"A lot of people are basing their prediction on Johnson beating Cloud, Green, Tarver etc, but ignoring Johnsons fights with b-level fighters that he has ultimately lost."

 

Then why did you feel the need to quailfy it by saying "may be" controversial?

 

Johnson made good effort against most of his opponents, but it is difficult to show a fight that he won clearly (apart from Green, but he is not likely to KO Froch). On top of that, he is not getting any younger.

Again, while I agree most of his recent losses are close (one may say controversial, I'm not going to split hairs over it), the bottomline is that even if he makes this fight competitive you can bet the judges wouldn't favour him all of sudden this time.

I wish him the best, but if I were to put some $$$ I would bet in on Froch safely.

 

I don't know. Does it matter that much?

Johnson lost, I felt he lost clearly, some may have felt he won. Therefore, because some people may have felt he won, but he did lose, then that makes the result controversial, even though it shouldn't be.

 

This will be a war. Even if Froch's gameplan is to stay disciplined...it isn't going to happen in this fight. Glen will get within range, hurt Froch to the body and wobble Froch a few times with some nice equilibrium shots. Froch will hold his own and battle back as he likes these sort of fights. The fight will be fiercely competitive and I see Froch winning a very close and contraversial decision (maybe a split decision). I see Froch's workrate holding out and guiding him to the victory.

Afterwards Johnson will call Froch a great fighter and then complain that Frochs punches landed on his gloves and that he won the fight.

Anybody who thinks Froch is cruising to a win a WIDE decision like he did against AA is in for an awakening.

 

I agree. 1 thing you know about GJ, he will get his shots in, he will come to fight. This should be a good one.

 

Froch by UD

 

johnson by brutal ko