Thoughts from Froch-Abraham

I didn't quite get the ringside seat I hoped for (they were for the main medias) but I had a real good seat nevertheless. This was the first time I have ever been watching world-class boxing live and the difference to the European championship level I have seen before was just astonishing.

Froch nor Abraham is known for being particularly fast and it was not really the speed that was stunning but the sharpness of every move they made and the snap in the punches. Seeing Froch's jab live made it perfectly clear why Abraham could not walk past it, the sting of it was impressive. Also, when Frock went hard to the body, the sound of the punches was loud several bench rows back. It is difficult to understand how a man can take such shots. Also it lead me to think what an awesome sight prime Roy Jones must have been.

The fight itself was not a great one but Froch's performance was. Apart from the third round and the last seconds he didn't leave any opportunities for Abraham to counter, instead he used his reach and distance masterfully, and when he threw a straight to body, Abraham couldn't do anything about it. Also Froch's power clearly bothered Abraham,, he couldn't walk through the punches as he did in the middleweight and got picked apart. In the sixth round it was already visible that he was discouraged and began to tire.

Oh, and one funny thing in boxing events are the idiots who are watching boxing but don't understand at all what happens. For example there was a Finnish sports broadcaster next to me, he has actually called some boxing fights in the past. In one undercard fight, which looked like a Cory Spinks fight (don't know if it was televised) he scored 8 rounds 10-8 despite neither guy was ever hurt. Another guy behind me had Abraham-Froch even after 11 rounds because "Abraham blocked all the punches":giggle:

 

Sounds like you had a good time.

 

Thoughts from Froch-Abraham?

Variety. You need a few strings to your bow if you are going to succeed at the very highest levels. I wouldn't say Froch is the greatest fighter of our time, but he is the highest level at 168, regardless.

In keeping with the common thought around here, I would say that Abraham looked a poor mans Chulvao last night.

Shuffling forward, gamely taking everything, offering very much outside of game, stubborn resistance and a tight guard.

No variety, no subtlety, no real guile or intuitiveness.

Marciano was often typecast as a face-first, unskilled, technically deficient fighter. Compared to Abraham last night, he is Willie Pep.

Rocky would bend at the waist, take far fewer clean blows {especially in proportion to what he landed}, stalk but creatively so...spy openings, hit the target with anything he had.

Once again, the man who does everything well and nothing exceptionally is always more likely to win the guy who does one thing well and the rest average.

Froch combined size and unorthodoxy with a variety of punches and workrate to overcome the harder-hitting but utterly ineffective Abraham.

Also....just for what it is worth, and I am borrowing from ElTerrible's observations here....a quiet, reassuring word in a fighters ear from his corner is worth 10 bollockings.

A bollocking is for a guy who has the opponent at his mercy and needs to go out and finish him {Manny to Lewis vs Tyson, Manny to Wlad vs Chambers}

A bollocking is not for a confidence deficient fighter who is losing or having difficulties {Manny to Taylor vs Spinks, McPherson to Williams vs Vitali, Wegner to Abraham vs Froch}

 

My thoughts are that Frochy boxed smartly as he should have, and put on a good performance. And that AA embarassed himself by not even giving himself a CHANCE to win.

I was wrong about AA. I thought dude had more variety than he did. But he's David Tua limited. Actually, thats kinda an insult to Tua, as the 96-97 Tua threw way more punches than AA.

 

I don't think that is entirely fair. Abraham is after all a MW who moved UP and straight into a scenario which was specifically designed to eliminate the chaff.

 

He still looked very impressive vs Taylor. Not only did he retain his power, but he looked alot more comfy at 168.

Abe might be a midget, but he's a very heavy boned guy, who's built for 168.

I dont think it was matter of size. That discredits Frochy. It was just a case of Abe not being a skilled fighter. I mean even the way he was throwing his punches was very amatuerish.

Billy Goat Ward has another easy one ahead of him.

 

Exactly. Good on you for calling how it is, and not making bullshit excuses.

Arabham is not exactly a midget either, he's 5'9/5'10 and very solidly built.

He simply has no skill, and is completely and utterly 1 dimensional. He made Frock look like Leonard.

By the way interesting post Ugo.

The stupidity sounds astounding. WTF on both counts. Did you ask the guy why he was giving 10-8 rounds?

Interesting about the difference between Euro level and world class too.

Sometimes when I see and hear the force of some flush punches, I actually think the same as you, how the fuck can a human withstand these shots? ::

 

Its just like Tito. When Tito destroyed Joppy, everyone was saying he was a NATURAL middleweight. Then Hopkins totally outclasses him, and everyone starts calling Tito a blown up welter.

Its a joke.

Weight had NOTHING to do with Abe flat out NOT punching.

 

He simply has no variety. He has no gears to move through.

As I say, Froch, if you want it this way, took 12 rounds to be a small opponent who had no skill.

:dunno:

 

Yep, nobody was saying Arabham was too small when he flattened Taylor and even against Dirrell.

Frock was obviously rangier and his punches carried more weight than Arabham was used to, but ultimately Frock simply outboxed him. Classic simple boxing, mainly with the jab. Frock is simply the better, more skilled fighter.

 

What does skill have to do with toughness? Your argument makes no sense at all. If Arabham won rounds, then you could say "Frock lost rounds against a fighter with no skill". But he didn't, he won every round. So what if Arabham lasted the distance? Skill != chin.

He literally has no skill. He plods around, then LOADS up on an ultra telegraphed explosion of haymakers. His footwork is crap, his jab is crap, he has no punch variety, no feints, no clever tricks, VERY basic defense, no plan b, no versatility.

He is completely without skill. He is simply tough, patient, and can punch.

 

WHO THE FUCK IS BASING THEIR ENTIRE ARGUMENT ON THE SIZE DIFFERENCE?

:dunno:

WE FUCKING KNOW FROCH OUTBOXED HIM.........

Jesus fucking Christ it's like speaking to Neil about the benefits of Magnolia paint.

 

Actually his jab is pretty stiff when he uses it. But.... he never does.

 

And to make matters worse for Abraham anybody who saw this fight will execute the same game plan. It's up to him to prove he can do something about it.

 

voila.

 

Yes. He moved up. Did Tua move up? :dunno:

I was referring to the "poor mans Tua" reference. Tua sucked at his own weight level. Abraham sucks at a new weight level.

How on earth you can parlay that into me saying Abraham lost to Froch soley because he was smaller is beyond me.

Abraham lost because he lacked the variety to overcome the size disparity which he was not so used to surrendering. Taylor was a former MW and Dirrel is half the fighter Froch is, though a better boxer.

Once Abraham found himself at a size disadvantage against an unorthodox and tough opponent he lacked the variety to do anything about it.

 

And again, you keep referencing size.

hut hut is even worse. He must be bitter about making such a stupid pick, because he basically insinuated that Frock won purely because of size/strength. ::

 

Actually I agree, his jab has some natural power on it, but it's still telegraphed and crap.

Yep, without a doubt. Just patiently outbox him and jab him and there's nothing he can do. Not unlike Tua really.

 

What would the final punch stats look in a fight between AA and SRR?

 

I leaned over him after six rounds, as I saw him doing notes, and asked how his scorecard read (I had it 58-56 for the Finnish guy). He had it 58-53 for the Finn. I was astounded and asked if he had given 10-8 rounds and he replied "Yes, three of them" like it was the most natural thing in the world. He explained, that in those rounds the other guy had been hit heavily (which never happened). His final score was about 113-108 or something like that:giggle:

 

I reference size as BEING PART...as BEING ONE PART of the equation.

I NEVER referenced size a being the single sole determining factor.

Neither did Hut Hut.

It was a combination of factors......the lack of variety compounding the size difference, and vise versa.

Fuck.

 

Insane. And this guy is a sports writer?

He makes the Sky Sports team sound objective :kidcool:

Did you say anything to the guy that had the Frock fight even?

 

For being just ONE component of his embarrassing one sided loss, you and hut hut sure do mention it a lot.

Fuck.

 

He is a TV reporter and calls several sports (none of which he actually knows anything of). You can just guess our pain when we saw fights like Barrera-Hamed and DLH-Mosley and this guy was doing the blow-by-blow.

I didn't speak to the other guy but he obviously was an Abraham fan

 

We mention it a lot in conjunction with the other factors, one of which is AA's not having any gears to go through. He is Hatton-esque when he can't impose his strength, and against Froch, he couldn't impose his strength thanks to the size difference and the unorthodoxy of Froch. Fighting Froch is like trying to pick up 20 fishing rods all at the same time. Once that happened, he entered Hatton vs Floyd territory- gamely plodding through the fight, with his being lit-up occasionally marked by periods of shuffling success. Not much more.

If Froch had gone for it, he could have secured the KO.

 

Yeah standard procedure. Universum also had a horse events/swimming announcer do the boxing, because their contract partner is a public TV station, who doesn´t fire people, they basically dusted him off from the archives.

The guys who write on boxing for the biggest papers, if they even bother to show up are often clueless. They are there to eat for free, socialise, and barely watch the fights.

 

Same in Ireland for boxing and soccer. People who know absolutely FUCK ALL about the sport but have memorized names and dates and can sound like they have been following it all their life.

By and large they are just there so they can say they were there.

 

That surprises me.

Isn't boxing pretty big in Germany?

A lot of the UK boxing commentators etc are clueless to an extent and very biased, but they are not THAT bad, I mean they do have experience covering boxing etc.

 

Sounds just like the annoying celebrities with ringside seats.