If a rematch between Froch-Ward ever happend Froch would win, here is why:

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Super Hans, Aug 31, 2014.


  1. frosty36

    frosty36 Active Member Full Member

    1,018
    4
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Nov 11, 2011
    I hope so. Don't think he would have too much trouble with Degale either if I'm honest. But Chavez would be the best option due to it being a bigger fight
     
  2. plank46

    plank46 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,476
    69
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Aug 23, 2013
    jccjr didn't want any of ggg. not sure if he thinks froch is an easier fight, or if he'll duck that one too. guy needs to get in the ring with a top level guy soon. i'd like to see abraham finish him off.
     
  3. duffy_89

    duffy_89 Active Member Full Member

    639
    12
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Mar 29, 2010
    Too be fair. I just think Ward has Froch's number!

    The thing that suprised Froch most last time, was how strong Ward was... I've never seen Froch pushed around and out strengthened like that before.

    Their styles dont mix anyway, so id rather not see it (Ward/Dirrell are the only two fighters to give froch a BORING! fight)
     
  4. jim jim

    jim jim Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,708
    3
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2014
    id love them to fight again , you have to give froch a chance its just one break he needs to change a fight, in england too with ward out of his comfort zone froch could easily win. be class if he could too. ward dirtiness is overplayed though i never find him too bad its not like froch is captain clean either
     
  5. madpuppy

    madpuppy Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,171
    3
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 15, 2011
    I fail to see how fighting in England would have any relevance on the result. Judges had no bearing on their first fight.
     
  6. jim jim

    jim jim Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,708
    3
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2014
    why does ward not do it then
     
  7. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super Oneā„¢ booted

    48,606
    75
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Apr 18, 2013

    I have never said a fighter has no chance (NONE), then they win in one sided fashion as Brook did against Porter.

    Froch would also beat Ward outside of Ward's comfort zone with PED testing.
     
  8. Taylor2010

    Taylor2010 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,064
    100
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 5, 2010
    :yep
     
  9. Talivar

    Talivar Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,021
    51
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jan 22, 2008
    If Ward fought Froch next Froch would win but only due to the fact Ward has been out for so long, has a lot of external issues going on and who knows how his injury and op have effected his ability in the later rounds when Froch comes on strong. People need to remember this will not be the same Ward by a long long long way.
    Ward vs Froch after Ward has got over his ring rust and resolved his issues ect is completly different, but to say Ward would beat Froch now is very naive and not taking any factor into consideration.
     
  10. Brit Sillynanny

    Brit Sillynanny Cold Hard Truth Full Member

    2,654
    4
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 1, 2009
    This kind of reasoning simply doesn't work. We've already seen a tournament that was proposed that had two objectives: one, bring veteran, established, physically mature European champions to the USA (a country in which two thirds of the population can trace their ancestry back to various European countries) to attempt to broaden their "international" fame, potentially gain US fans (not unlike the brief "Pavlik" acclaim in the country's heartland), and add to their success (beyond the accomplishments and legacies they had built in Europe) and two, to try to springboard two young Americans at SMW to the American audience in a sport (boxing) in long, long general decline over here (with few exceptions). The Europeans risked travel, took the challenge of a round-robin competition, and put their reputations and greater experience on the line backed by the following: Abraham - 29 years of age with 12 consecutive major title fights coming in, Froch - 32 years with 2 consecutive major title fights, and Kessler - 30 years with 9 major title fights. The Americans (Ward & Dirrell) risked their future by putting it on the line earlier than others with less guts would have against mature, tough, and well established fighters. Ward brought 25 years of age with 0 major title fights and Dirrell brought 26 years with 0 major title fights to the party.

    When the S6 was being discussed both Ward and Dirrell could have easily taken a pass especially as not all athletes mature at the same rate and Dirrell was still far from physically mature. Ward and Dirrell were a long way from peak as the details were being worked out. They could have waited until they were 28, 29, 30, or 31 to face these same fighters at a time in which they would be peak and their opponents would be well past theirs. These fights would have still been available to them without the tournament in the coming years. Yet, both fighters didn't hesitate at all to agree to the proposed challenge.

    Then, the 25 year old Ward backed up and effectively outclassed Kessler. The technical decision was an out to avoid Mikkel leaving the ring horizontally in the very next round if it had continued. An immature Dirrell at 26 years fought a 32 year old Froch - in Nottingham - and after a difficult start landed more punches, all of the clean power shots, and made Froch look to be untalented.

    Ward would go on to handle both Abraham and Froch will no trouble (other than a damaged hand that made him take his foot off the pedal late against Carl). Young Dirrell was easily outclassing the dangerous puncher in Abraham until the punch Abraham threw in frustration when Dirrell was down having slipped on the wet canvas.

    It is more than clear that Dirrell would have been a nightmare for Kessler if they had fought too. The bottom line is that two young fighters - non-peak - far from mature in the case of Dirrell - were significantly more talented and better fighters than the three Europeans. They were given the choice to be in a tournament against tough opposition. The three European fighters (and their promoters and management) believed their greater experience and accomplishments would be more than enough against these very young still developing American fighters.

    Everyone liked their own chances. Ward and Dirrell believed that while they were young they were more talented than the three Europeans. They turned out to be correct in their assessment.

    What didn't change - IN THE USA - with the tournament is that boxing remains on a long multi-generational downward glide path and America's youth have effectively stopped participating in the sport. Thus, there was no real benefit for the fighters involved. Casual US sport fans still don't know any of the Americans or the European "champions". One tournament was not going to change anything. And, it didn't.

    With the exception of Floyd, no American fighters can sell out ANYTHING in the US. It has little to nothing to do with Andre Ward. While some Hispanic-Americans can generate buzz with that portion of the population to sell some seats the reality is that boxing is long out of favor. Its aggregate numbers are at the same level as rodeos in the US - no exaggeration - as RODEOS.


    But, the point is that both Ward and Dirrell certainly wish the sport was as popular and followed as our other major sports. If Ward would agree to fight Kessler, Froch, and Abraham at 25 years of age he would fight them ANYTIME. Froch is not a greater fighter when you acknowledge he would lose (and I'll fix your statement - HE WOULD LOSE EVERY TIME) to Ward H2H. Froch is just in a better fight environment being from Europe IN THIS ERA than Ward is being from the USA.


    The greater fighter is the greater fighter (i.e., the one who wins H2H). If Carl was an American he would have the same difficulties in his career. The sport with very few exceptions has long been a fringe sport in the US not unlike professional tennis or golf. There are occasional big events but it pales in comparison to the regular day to day, week to week, month to month attention the others garner now. It is cultural, it is economic as it relates to a lack of educational subsidy, and it is the result of the majority of the youth of America ignoring the sport.


    Even Joe knows the first part of your sentence is not true. You could see it on his face when he threw two handed hammers like a desperate spastic that he recognized that he was the inferior athlete in the ring on April 19, 2008 at the Thomas & Mack. Thank goodness he had a more than 43 year old "version" of Bernard Hopkins across the ring that night. Without seven years of comparative youth to bail him out he wouldn't want no part of Bernard Hopkins. The prime version had energy to burn and was an aggressive hunter. The Hopkins in his 40's has been successful while at the same time struggling in many many close rounds against nearly every fighter he has faced. Even the mediocrity (Ornelas, Murat, & Shumenov) have been competitive for stretches, with close rounds to judge, and even a potential threat at times, and if you took away the "reputational" bias BHOP is accorded in all of his fights from Jermaine Taylor onward they have all been difficult. Why that would be a surprise is beyond me.

    Some people seem to be unfamiliar with the aging process and how that relates to athletics. Ever see some actress or movie star that used to be hot and then you see them in their 40s and you wonder how they got so fat and wasted looking? It's called aging. It happens to everyone and it happens pretty easily. The few exceptions are those that have the money and time to fight against it by working out religiously, and getting cosmetic help here and there. The reality is that seven years between Calzaghe and Hopkins is huge. The reality is that Hopkins against ANYONE is a struggle now.

    If Calz had went from Eubank in late '97 to face a 33 or 34 year old Bernard Hopkins (with BHOP adding 8 lbs of muscle to meet him at 168) in '98 or '99, Joe would have been chewed up.

    The only thing Joe has over OLD BHOP is his engine. BHOP in his prime would have wrecked him.
     
  11. Brit Sillynanny

    Brit Sillynanny Cold Hard Truth Full Member

    2,654
    4
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 1, 2009
    Not a chance in the world.

    You must have a misconception about athletes. Ward continues to train even without a fight. His every thought is about the fights he sees and wants. He is coming into this physical prime. Even his "off" time revolves around doing color for boxing. He isn't off doing gymnastics and/or dancing with the stars. I doubt Carl fights him again. It wouldn't even be close.
     
  12. Talivar

    Talivar Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,021
    51
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jan 22, 2008
  13. Brit Sillynanny

    Brit Sillynanny Cold Hard Truth Full Member

    2,654
    4
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 1, 2009
    Cheers, man.

    :good
     
  14. Moanamchara

    Moanamchara Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,447
    151
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 11, 2010
    So judging by your observations Trout is the greater fighter than Cotto? Benard Hopkins isn't better than Jermain Taylor, Joe Calzaghe,and Chad Dawson?Medgoen Singsurat is greater than Pacqiao? JMM isn't greater than Chris John? Roy Jones Jr is obviously not as great as Tarver eitheir I assume? See where your bias obviously falls flat? Froch even since the end of the Super six has been fighting the top guys in the SMW division where Ward hasn't done anything but kill a weight drained zombie. Froch has the better resume and is the greater fighter as of now deal with it. That's not saying Ward can't come back and prove to be greater at a later date. Also to say that Ward who is chinny will win every time it is nonsense this is boxing it only takes one punch even if Froch loses 99 out of 100. The greater fighter is the one with the better resume as in taking on the better opposition and winning. Froch has a better resume than Ward.


    Don't be upset that Wards punch,hold,headbutts,punch,hold,headbutts style doesn't put asses in seats. Lucratively the fight only makes sense in the UK and seeing how Ward has said he only wants big money fights that makes sense.

    Netheir Calzaghe or BHOP were prime but Joe did beat him in the smack middle of some of his best wins and yes he did beat him and Hopkins was doing everything under the sun to spoil a fight he was losing. The fight was even in America. You seem to forget that fighters have different primes and Joe wasn't in his eitheir or that Joe also had severe hand problems. Joe had also out landed Hopkins by nearly double and landed more punches on him than any previous opponent.

    Yea I am sure you will come up with more BS obvious troll is obvious.
     
  15. Brit Sillynanny

    Brit Sillynanny Cold Hard Truth Full Member

    2,654
    4
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    May 1, 2009

    Why assume anything when you have specific statements you can reference? I gave you enough words to work with so at no point is it logical to add off the wall assertions (like those above) and attempt to attribute them to me. Find someone to translate if you can't follow the plot and come back in a few months or years when you have a better handle on things.

    I can see that English is not your first language. That's fine. I'm sure you are cogent and coherent in some other language.

    Still, let me cut through your response in pieces ...

    "Froch has the better resume and is the greater fighter ..."

    Froch has a fine resume. He has taken on an absolutely terrific string of opponents since late '08 starting when he was 31 years of age. While much credit is due for fighting substantive (and one should even say "stellar" - relative to this era) opposition the other side of the equation is the success rate. He is due great respect for who he has fought. Unfortunately, this discussion is meant to make the case for being a greater fighter than Andre Ward.

    If the entire argument could be swayed by opposition then it would be necessary to be successful against all of that opposition or for Ward to have been unsuccessful (to allow for an examination of their respective wins and losses) or have fought no one of merit. Neither are true.

    Froch's first loss was a close (closer than the cards indicated) unanimous decision to Mikkel Kessler (in Denmark). This was five months after Mikkel was dominated by the 25 year old Andre Ward. Froch's second loss was a wide (much wider than the cards indicated) unanimous decision to Andre Ward (in Atlantic City, NJ).

    Ward has never lost.

    Everyone would agree that Froch has fought a great string of fights on the bounce since '08 (Pascal). We can list them for effect: Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler, Abraham, Johnson, Ward, Bute, Mack, Kessler, Groves, Groves.

    Andre Ward, OTOH, has a comparatively "softer" list starting from the same date in '08 (Froch's Pascal fight) when he was a mere 24 years of age. We can list them for effect: Camou, Buchanan, Miranda, Pudwill, Kessler, Green, Bika, Abraham, Froch, Dawson, Rodriguez.

    Froch has fought 12 times since December '08. Ward has fought 11 times since December '08.

    In fact, just as it would be unproductive - in this instance - to discuss the quality, difficulty, if not "legitimacy" of certain wins (or losses) it would be equally so to ignore losses, losses to the fighter under discussion (Ward), and form and quality in assessing the "greater fighter". The resume is an important component . The reality answers the question.

    Froch has fought a great line of opponents only losing to Ward and Kessler.

    Ward has fought a great line of opponents DEFINED by Froch and Kessler. He was not run close by either.

    Any remaining question of relative "greatness" between Froch and Ward can be left to watching technique, ring generalship, and athletic quality. The answers are evident. Visit a gym. Get away from your computer. Discover athletics.

    ---------

    I was going to correct all of your other mistaken thoughts and opinions on AW and on JC, on punch stats, etc. but I have other things to attend. I was at the JC/BHOP fight. Joe didn't land sixty-five punches. They were both horrible on the night. Just re-read my post(s). Like it or not, it is valid and accurate.
     


Sign up for ESPN+ and Stream Live Sports! Advertisement