Groves get more stick then Gavin

I was at Wembley that night and saw with my own eyes, so highly doubting I could've been influenced by HBO.

I've since watched it back and viewed it the exact same.

It was much cagier fight than the first, I had Groves just ahead before Froch landed his bingo shot.

Groves for me, was trying to keep something in the tank as he knew Froch comes on strong and as he found out in the first fight, stick it on Froch early and he'll still be there anyway - the man is made of iron. If he could be level or just ahead of Froch by rounds 7 and 8 with a good bit left in the tank, he could then put it on Froch more when Froch did come on strong.

Groves is the better boxer "technically" of the two, for me the rematch was his to lose.. which he did when he got sloppy falling for the trap Froch set, opening his shoulder out and throwing the left hook. Froch though, is an underrated boxer himself and got behind the jab, he was more disciplined & was judging distance much better. End result, Froch landed the big right hand and that's all she wrote.

 

how that equates to saying he had no gameplan i honestly don't know. i just don't buy that they thought their best option was to drag froch the later rounds and step it up from there. knowing what we do about both fighters, it defies logic.[/quote]


I didnt say that Groves plan was "to take it to Froch" in the latter rounds but if i did its not what i meant. He defo paced himself in the first half of the fight no question to make sure he had enough left to get thro the latter rounds ie being to fatigued that he cannot take any shots (which is essentially what happened in the first fight Groves was gassed and his punch resistence and concentration had all but gone)

 

So you like the London area boxers joshua and groves

I really didnt realise you favour the london boxers....you didnt make it really noticable did u