Froch v Groves 2 Final Thoughts

Would agree GG landed more big shots in first fight, well up to and including round 6. Froch is not fancy, or flash but is a very clever fighter, because he is not flashy or fancy a lot of people don't see it including opponents until its to late. Read a recent interview were Virgil Hunter said he watched the first fight with Andre Ward, who said to Virgin Hunter Groves is winning this easy after 6 rounds, Hunter said no he is not, Froch has put ground work in, is hitting Groves ribs all the time, and in a few rounds he will have slowed him down that much he will stop him. What happened is he stopped him, YES REF stopped it a it early, but nevertheless Froch would have knocked him out within next 10-20 seconds. So that's my point you have a p4p top 5 fighter who beat Froch who cant see what he is doing, so what chance did Groves have of knowing?

Froch/GG 2 I had froch 5-2 up as he controlled fight, was one on front foot, took centre of ring and was killing GG to the body, everytime they went toe to toe on ropes Froch won battle.

Agree George has skills, personally not sure if he has enough power for elite level, totally agree he don't have stamina or toughness. If he wins a world title he wont hold it for long.

In this country we think the flashier the boxer the better he is, that's were we are wrong. My 2 favourite ever boxers are Scott Harrison and Carl Froch, neither are really fast, but they can control the middle of a ring, and do that under the radar, have great jabs, and are good combination punchers who are real hard men with great stamina, and a strong punch/good chin. You combine all that and you have someone at there peak who can only get beat of a p4p top 10 fighter

 

think we're not give george a fair crack of the whip in terms of power...he's only fought one man that is legitemetely world class...and he's hurt him probably more than i ve ever seen him hurt in that first fight and by all accounts froch is a very hard man to put away no ones ever done it and they've all landed their best on him. Also in the second fight everytime he landed, froch felt it...rocked him with a left hand jab/hook quite badly.

I think what we're doing is because he hurt froch so much in the first fight and everybody's jamp to conclusions that he's suddenly a devastating puncher, we're now judging him more harshly on it. He's got more one shot power that a lot at world level for me. I think his power is legitimate. I dont think thats a problem for him. It's not like he's powder puff powerwise i think it's legitimate when comparable to other figghters the real problem is can he land it the same way he done to froch...who in most people's opinions is relatively easy to hit for world level. And to back george up outside of the froch fight...he seems to have very good power.

There's a bit of khan about him for me...a man with great tools...even world level tools but just a bit too flawed and it will always come back again and again. The thing is contrary to what others have said i think groves has very very good ring iq...it's just that when he's tagged or he tires...it's not. Again not fair to say he has poor ring iq as a whole. At least with khan you can improve ring iq, but with george's weakness there's not a lot you can do to improve it...durability. It seems to me his stamina goes when he's tagged mainly. He seems to work hard enough in training...how do you counteract it??

With george i would have a real throw of the dice with his career. How long will he be explosive...i would only have him fighting another 3 years but in them three years i would put him in their with the best...as a front foot fighter. I say anyone at world level, he has a real go at...will have difficulties with him.

I would forget about the back foot fighting. Obviously a soft come back fight or two in quick succession then get him in their with abraham...and take it from there, it's sink or swim...i think he'll do that anyway. Because he's the type of fighter that someone thats not on his level can take out in an exchange for example like khan against prescott.

I genuinely think if george goes in their with the same intention he did with froch in the first fight...he'll finish a lot of them. As far fetched as that sounds. If groves can hit them the same way he hit froch...he'll take a lot out of them at worst...and soften them up. The longer a fighter like groves stays in the ring the more chance he has of getting poleaxed, or stopped. The biggest problem is he can box on the back-foot. With someone like froch your limited in what you can do with him...because he can only really fight one way to an extent...and he does it better than anyone.

I know one thing not a lot of people will look forward to fighting groves that was coming to have a real go...i know i wouldn't be...and i think froch wasn't too keen either the first time round or the second...i genuinely believe froch was wary of george for both fights. The first time was more because he knew george's style could give him trouble plus he didn't like the pressure of fighting someone he should be beating and 2nd time because he knew what george could bring. He dealt with it in the end...but people dont make the changes carl did if they're not genuinely worried about it.

 

Another final thought I have regarding Groves is how would other fighters in his division fared against him after he landed that punch in round one of the first fight. Froch has all time chin and endurance qualities, I think Groves could have crushed some decent fighters on that form. Its a question of how damaged he is after this fight really, he could in theory come back and clean in with that speed and power.

 

We need mainstream attention, and what happened last weekend is very, very exciting for the sport.

My only gripe with casuals is the fact they suddenly switched their support back to Froch at the end of the fight and booed GG. What a load of bollox. But it is the price we way.

 

DeGale is mandatory for the IBF mate. Solid win even back then.

 

Most of the other World Class SMW's wouldn't of been caught with that shot.

Too many people blinded by the first Froch fight, Groves is getting way too much credit.

Had froch closed the show first time around without the controversy, we wouldn't even be talking about Groves.

Groves career highlights are losing twice to Froch and beating a shop worn and ageing johnson, lets be honest here, Johnson was coming off three straight losse's at SMW, and had already been dismantled By Bute, who many consider a bum.

 

I'm a huge fan of Froch and all that he has achieved but if I am totally honest, up until "The Perfect Punch" was thrown, I don't really think the fight was that action packed or exciting.
I've never liked Groves really but to be fair to him, he did put up a good fight in both fights against Froch and did very well. Even though leading up to the fight he was very childish.
Groves is a young talented fighter and has a lot of future in boxing and can still come back from this and win some amazing fights in the future.
In regards to Froch, I think his number 1 aim should be to try and settle a fight with Chavez in the MGM Grand, ultimately if he can't do that, I think he needs to tie up the loose end that is Andre Direll and if he wins that, then he needs to retire because if he beats Direll and Chavez, he has nowhere to go and no-one to fight.

 

Froch should cash himself out to the max. Groves should keep his head down, find a world class trainer, and re-build. If things don't work out for him I could see him ending up doing reality tv.

 

Not really a fair shake two shakes...for me why wouldn't you give groves credit for the first fight...he fought and was well ahead against froch a 4 weight world champion as a relatively untested at that level 26 years old, to me it's crazy to say he got way too much credit. You've got to give credit where it's due...the same way we give froch the credit for putting it to bed.

I still say...if the first fight was allowed to go on and froch did legitimetely stop him...there would still have been a call for a rematch...i'd go as far to say froch was ducking if he never took it.(thats me personally)

Also groves has a win over degale...a good fighter that people are beginning to see...glen johnson was a good win for anyone regardless of how many losses he had going in...how many losses did he have before he fought froch...we know one thing johnson will always give most a good nights work. And the losing twice to froch was close and competetive as pretty much most have called.

Here's an interesting point in contrast when froch was 26 he fought....Alan Page,michael monaghen and valery Odin. And still went on to do what he done. I say it's harsh judging george and not looking at him as potentially a very very good talent that could still go on to carve out a career at the top level...i honestly think all we can really take ifrom the 2 fights for certain is...he genuinely has durability issues at the top level, weather it holds him back totally the jury's out. But no one should be saying after watching his career to date that he doesn't have the power, speed, definetely not good enough for it etc...just yet.

Also i dont get the chavez fight...it's a bit random apart from dollars. Theirs other fights out their like ward, degale, even kessler (which i personally do not want to see again...he's too shopworn now for me if the froch 2 fight was anything to go by.) But again carl has earned the right to do what he wants.

 

:good

 

That's true but in their respective career span I would say george has less time left than froch did at 26 due to their styles. groves won't last until the same age as froch as his style is based on speed and explosiveness, 2 of the first things to go. Groves best years could be from 24-34 while frochs could be from 28-38. If we look at the career trajectory that way then and say groves is 2 or 3 years into his best years then look at froch 2 or 3 years into his best years then froch had already started the jean pascal onwards run of opponents

 

Good point, but carl froch was 30/31 and still fighting Albert Rybacki, Robin Reid, Sergey Tatevosyan...and you've got guys saying that grove's has done nothing to suggest he can hang at world class level in the future. He fought jean pascal at 32 and went on to have the best part of his career from 32-37, can anyone say they thought froch would last till then at world level after seeing his early career??

You cant, especially with as much as carl got hit at british and euro level, i ll be honest he was one of the fighters i thought wouldn't last at that level not because he wasn't good...but simply because he took too many shots. A lot of boxing experts would have thought that his durability would have went by now with the shots he's took, and i was one of them that thought that after the groves 1 fight, and it would be a fair assumption.

I would say that groves has a better chance at world level than it looked like carl had, and carl went out their and proved most of us wrong. With george the stumbling block is the maturity/durability rather than anything else. No one should be writing him off completely. I can see people saying he wont hang at that level because of his durability...because it's kind of a big attribute needed at that level...but for anything else...i dont think it's fair to say after watching both fights.

 

You've pretty much answered as i would have.

I'd also have added that Groves success in the first fight had as much to do with Froch being reckless, as Groves finding the target.

Another reason would be promotion and PR, Groves got a massive amount of exposure in the build up to the Degale fight, this was mostly because of Degales credentials, and the boxing publics expectations.

 

Groves was fighting Froch as mandatory ( whilst ranked 4th, go figure ) 6 years after turning pro.

Froch was fighting Pascal for the vacant WBC title 6 years after turning pro.

 

So we dont credit groves for it, it was just down to froch being reckless more than george deserving the credit??

Do we still credit froch for the knock-out punch even though george was reckless??

We cant really have it both ways for me.