Fair enough, you should check those fights out though. The Pascal fight is a good scrap, and he gave Boot a vicious beating. Probably 2 of his most entertaining fights.
Froch looks sloppy and toughman-esque, but it works for him. He's a good, solid guy, one of the best at 168. Some guys just have real ugly styles, even some great or borderline great fighters have been "ugly"
Purists are entitled to dislike Froch and his glaring technical shortcomings. However, anyone who is not entertained by his fights is either {a} Evil Knievel or {b} a self-loathing rap-listening-to-faggit with identity issues. Now Neil, you don't much look like your are into motor-sickles, now do you son? Neil, I want you to look at this photograph and tell me what you see:
i dont like froch so i dont make it a point to watch his fights. i dont like the klitschkos either, so same thing. deal with it, pussy.
i make it a point to watch him. I thought Bute would slap him silly but Froch is like one of those machines they have in the bank for detecting fakes. Booty got Called that night.
For a guy who severely underrated Frock back in the day, I at least feel good about getting Frock vs Boot bang on :kidcool:
BTW cdogg, I very much agree with this. Some people put far too much stock into the aesthetics and form of a fighter, his punching technique and the overall "prettyness" of his style. For example old Ramone was just blinded by Vitali, couldn't see past his "ugly" style and therefore thought he was a scrub. You have guys like Frock and Vitali that albeit awkward, ugly, and sloppy looking are just natural fighters. They have natural ringsmarts, boxing IQ, toughness, they simply know how to fight. And I'm sure there are better examples, but on the other side of the coin you have guys like Ortiz or Linares who have much "prettier", more correct, less sloppy styles, but none of the ringsmarts and natural fighting ability of a Frock or Vitali.