Groves punch stats

Just tweeted me back and said he doesn't usually count... twat.

 

If you re-watch the fight (ideally with sound off) you actually see that Groves not only didn't land much more than Froch in most rounds (2, 3, 5 and 6 were pretty even) but that Froch appeared to land many of the heavier shots.

I was hoping for the punch stats to show that the fight was actually far less one-sided than a lot of people are suggesting.

FWIW I scored 2, 5 and 8 for Froch. If you were looking for rounds to give to Froch 3 and 6 could also be argued which I'm betting is reflected in the much maligned 76-75 scorecards.

Likewise the stoppage was a genuine if IMO partly mistaken decision to protect Groves from harm. Groves had been slumped on Froch for some seconds and dragging his feet after a previous exchange and whilst IMO he was simply trying to grab a bit of a breather it was apparent that the ref thought he was badly hurt, you can see the ref looking worried and thinking about stepping in - it was in this frame of mind that the ref waved it off after seeing him immediately bullied to the ropes and stunned again.

In the end the commentary team, whilst very spirited and excitable, were not providing an accurate description of the action in the ring, calling many shots for Groves that were either blocked, slipped or barely landed. In the end, a re-viewing showed that Froch was only wobbled slightly once more in the fight (5 or 6 I think) and even then looked in no real danger. Equally he was landing solid shots throughout the fight, mainly to the body.

In short there was no conspiracy, there was a bad but genuinely mistaken stoppage and a more even fight than the commentary suggested was reflected in the maligned scorecards.

Compubox stats are generally not used in UK broadcasts as far as I'm aware (it's just a US thing), but if they were IMO they would also reflect the fact that the fight was far less one-sided than many believe.

 

Yeah, must be a conspiracy, I mean who could possible imagine corruption in boxing.

 

The awful commentary (standard) from Sky really did take away from the fight and made it difficult to score live. Watching again I had it:

Round 1, 10-8 Groves.
Round 2, 10-9 Froch.
Round 3, 10-10 (edge to Froch but could have gone either way).
Round 4, 10-10 (edge to Groves, again, could go either way).
Round 5, 10-9 Froch.
Round 6, 10-9 Groves (but Froch did more damage).
Round 7, 10-9 Groves.
Round 8, 10-9 Froch.

77-76 to Groves after 8 rounds.

The two cards at 76-75 probably had Froch getting 3 and Groves 4. Equally, I could see a 77-74 card that gave both 3 and 4 to Groves. I'm not sure which of 2,5 or 8 I'd give to Groves to match the 78-73 card though?

There's a clip available that shows the end of the fight from another angle, over Froch's shoulder. The last two punches really connect and Groves is looking at the ground and barely knows where Froch is. I thought it was definitely an early stoppage, even if that meant a couple of seconds more to see if Groves would right himself or stagger off (then it could be stopped).

I agree that the per round punch stats would show the fight, on the cards was close. Overall they probably show Groves as decently ahead as his 10-9 rounds were a bit more convincing than Froch's but we score on a round by round basis.

 

How could you or anyone possibly argue that Froch took round 6? It was Groves biggest round aside from the knockdown in round 1.

Groves landed right hands continuously, bossed the toe-toe exchanges with Froch looking to break away and even after the bit of success that Froch had in the round, Groves still out jabbed Froch and was last to land before the bell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uulVUFnsMKY

 

If you had this fight by only one point to Groves you should have your boxing fan license revoked. Either that or go away and watch more fights.

 

Round 6 was a clear Groves round.

 

Round 5 was Froch's first round.

 

:deal

this

 

I would imagine in total Froch threw quite a lot more shots than Groves, landed more shots than Groves and threw and landed more Power shots than Groves.

However, I would also guess that Groves had a higher percentage than Froch.

Groves was leading on every scorecard which was correct, but was stopped.

It may have been 3 or 4 seconds prematurely, but Froch wasn't going to let him off the hook and I have yet to read the opinion of a single professional boxing journalist who didn't think Froch would have gone on to stop Groves :good

 

There is no evidence to prove he would be stopped. People are basing it on their own biased opinions.

 

LOL you cannot argue round 6 for Froch. Groves landed a sucession of about 8 fight ending punches on Frochs Chin. One of Groves biggest rounds.

 

I just don't see it. Groves lands a few good rights but all single punches. Froch does some great work to the body and has a few combinations. I thought it was one of his best rounds, certainly in terms of boxing rather than landing punches that hurt Groves.

 

Froch was in a much, much worse state than Groves ever was.

How was he not deducted points in the fight? Farcical.

 

Strange that people are saying "all the experts think Froch would've finished it".

All the experts thought Froch would win the fight clearly, that Groves would be out of his depth, and that he wouldn't have the power to hurt Froch.

Nobody knows what would have happened.

What isn't open to debate is that Groves was well ahead in the fight, despite the judges doing their best to ignore that, and the ref stopped the fight when Groves was coming forwards and throwing shots at Froch. Anything outside that about what might have happened isn't worth listening to, as most experts had it bang wrong before the fight.