Froch beat Taylor because he's more skilled.

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009.


Page 4 of 15
  1. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    Exactly! Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding this?
     
    charlievint, Apr 28, 2009
    charlievint, Apr 28, 2009
    #46
  2. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    I failed?

    Why?

    Taylor had him beat in speed, explosiveness, experience, had enough power to put Froch down, and according to you had more skills than Froch....

    ...So how exactly did Taylor lose when he has everything going for him against Froch?

    I'm the one that failed, so why don't you lecture me.

    I think Taylor is incredibly amateurish. I think Froch has more skills, but is lacking rhythmm.
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #47
  3. quocnam

    quocnam Member Full Member

    347
    0
    Sep 30, 2007
    I think the reason Taylor lost - yes it is due to his stamina - But the other thing is: he has a shorter reach. You can see that it is hard for him to get into Froch, he has to go through a longer jab. The reason he was able to win over Hopkin is because of his size.
     
    quocnam, Apr 28, 2009
    quocnam, Apr 28, 2009
    #48
  4. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    You really thought that Taylor was winning the fight?

    I think you might have to take a timeout and slap yourself for that comment.

    If Froch lost the fight because he failed to KO Taylor in the 12th, it would have been a damn robbery.
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #49
  5. booradley

    booradley Mean People Kick Ass! Full Member

    39,848
    16
    Aug 29, 2006

    Jesus Christ man, how much did you drink that night??:patsch
     
    booradley, Apr 28, 2009
    booradley, Apr 28, 2009
    #50
  6. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    So, wouldn't a persons's skillset be able to compensate for their size?

    I thought that's was skills were about.

    Apparently though, nobody else seems to thinks so. So because Taylor was the smaller man, he lost?

    So basically what people are saying is that skills don't really factor into the fight or that Taylor was more skilled than Froch, but not enough to overcome his size, despite having more speed, just as much or more power, obviously according to the outcome of this thread, more skills, and more experience?

    I mean, maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't that about the jist of it?
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #51
  7. Rudyard

    Rudyard **** How You Feel!! HOE! banned

    27,672
    1
    Jan 30, 2009
    :patsch
    So I guess you missed the actual scorecards before the stoppage??? Then you have the ****ing audacity to question someone's knowledge for the sport....You're the one who needs to slap yourself!
     
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    #52
  8. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    Can anyone explain to me why Taylor was so hesitant to finish Froch off when he had him hurt?
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #53
  9. BeaverDan

    BeaverDan Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,834
    108
    Jul 23, 2007
    I think Axe Man has as much a valid point as anybody else.

    What he's saying is that IF Taylor is truly more skilled than Froch, then why didn't he win the fight? Surely, the more skilled fighter should overcome anything an inferior openent throws at them?

    I think we're all underestimating mind over matter, and Axe Man made a very good point in saying that Mayweather said his best skill was his brain. Didn't Ali use his brain as a skill to defeat bigger, stronger and determined foes?
     
    BeaverDan, Apr 28, 2009
    BeaverDan, Apr 28, 2009
    #54
  10. sdsfinest22

    sdsfinest22 Pound 4 Pound Full Member

    37,732
    1
    Apr 19, 2007
    Your thread is titled "Froch beat Taylor because he's more skilled." He didn't beat him cuz he has more skills. He beat him because he is a bigger, stronger fighter that can take a punch and keep giving. If this fight woulda went to the scorecards with a 10-7 12th round Taylor still takes it by a point! I had Taylor up 4 going into the 12th round 106-102 and the 12th woulda been a 10-7 but that wouldn't have won it! Taylor got knocked but not cuz the other guy had "more skill."

    YOU ALWAYS FAIL!:bart
     
    sdsfinest22, Apr 28, 2009
    sdsfinest22, Apr 28, 2009
    #55
  11. Rudyard

    Rudyard **** How You Feel!! HOE! banned

    27,672
    1
    Jan 30, 2009
    :-(
    Taylor lost because he didnt have the stamina to keep up the pace he set during the ealier rounds...His stamina failed him in the championship rounds...

    What the **** are you talking about??
     
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    #56
  12. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    Oh, because the judges are always right, aren't they?

    So what you're saying is that robbery's never happen in boxing?

    Because this is what I'm getting from what you're saying.

    Honestly, Rudyard, I don't think you have much knowledge of boxing at all.

    Everyone looks like a genius when they pick Floyd Mayweather to win a fight.
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #57
  13. BITCH ASS

    BITCH ASS "Too Fast" Full Member

    9,440
    5
    Jul 10, 2006
    Taylor said in the interview that he had images of the Kelly Pavlik knockout in his mind. He didn't mention his stamina, which leads me to believe that it was his nerves that got to him, rather than his stamina.

    Consequently though, nerves often effect your stamina. The same thing has happened to Klitschko as well.

    It's not that the man isn't supremely conditioned, it's just that he doesn't handle pressure very well and his nerves get to him.
     
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    BITCH ASS, Apr 28, 2009
    #58
  14. TheUnstoppable

    TheUnstoppable Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,328
    1
    Jul 14, 2008
    Froch is crude, sloppy and very low on technical ability, but he makes up for it with inate abilities such as his strength, power and durability.

    If you consider that and Taylors common practise of fading after 6 or 7 rounds its obvious why he lost - he was clearly outboxing Froch and giving him hell (he looked so confused and out of his depth it was unbelievable) up until his output dropped and his stamina was no longer there to fuel what he needed to win the fight: his speed, timing and work-rate.

    So all things considered its easy to see that Taylor is a more skilled and articulate boxer, but was trumped when he was confronted by a man with much more stamina than him, who dominated him when he came on strong at the end both in activity and pressure.
     
    TheUnstoppable, Apr 28, 2009
    TheUnstoppable, Apr 28, 2009
    #59
  15. Rudyard

    Rudyard **** How You Feel!! HOE! banned

    27,672
    1
    Jan 30, 2009
    He lost the fight because he was fatigued...PERIOD...its pretty obvious who is the better skilled fighter...I mean you dont build a lead like that just by doing abosutely nothing...Froch deserves credit for taking advantage of a fatigued fighter in Taylor.
     
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    Rudyard, Apr 28, 2009
    #60
Page 4 of 15