Froch v Groves - bigger than Benn v Eubank?

Or is this just a spin story from Eddie Hearn to drum up even more interest?

I'm not old enough to remember what the Benn v Eubank event was like in terms of media, public interest, was just wondering whether some of the older members of this page feel how Froch and Groves matches up.

Absolutely can't wait for the fight, all the pressure is on Groves now. He's campaigned so hard for the rematch, made alot of noise, so he's going to look foolish if he doesn't back it up now, completely different from the first fight where all the pressure was on Froch really. I think Groves wins it personally, he's just got to be careful about being drawn into a war in the later rounds. If he'd boxed Froch on the back foot for the last 4-5 rounds of the last fight, I think he'd easily have won the fight. He's quicker than Froch, he won the jab exchange last time, he can land at will on Froch, he's got the better defence. A better ref, and a bit more intelligence from Groves, I feel he can embarrass Froch.

Lastly, can Froch come across any more loathsome in the media?! Started making childish jokes about Groves receding hairline today, and remember this is the person who said Groves had behaved 'very childishly' in the build up last time, even though he was just pointing out facts to Froch. I think Groves absolutely destroys him in every verbal exchange. Froch will say something, Groves will ask him to explain it, and Froch will just completely fall to pieces. He also contradicts himself on a very regular basis.

Anyway, looking forward to the build up and the fight.

Eubank v Benn was bigger.  It was on terrestrial TV and I think around 10 million tuned in.  Benn and Eubank were just far better characters and they really sold the fight.

Nigel Benn was one dangerous man and you believed him when he said he wanted to kill Eubank.  Benn was like a British version of Tyson in terms of his punching ability and overall ruthlessness. Few boxers have had a more suitable moniker than Benn, he really was the Dark Destroyer.

Eubank was a lippy git and generally as full of crap as he is today.  I knew who I wanted to win and from memory I was with the majority.

Agreed Strongback, it was a case of "the man in the street" knowing who both fighters were, having their favourite; I don't think that either fighter has a particularly high profile in the wider world. That's the difference between terrestrial and Sky,as you say.

Personally I liked both fighters and it was the best of times to be a boxing fan in this country.Eubank may indeed be largely full of fertilizer but his comments that really stuck in Benn's craw were to the effect that boxing was a brutal business and that he was in it for the money.Doesn't seem such a contentious stance in retrospect..particularly when you remember McClennan,Watson...

I'd definately say that Benn vs Eubank was far bigger and better than Froch vs Groves 2!! Contracts signed live on air, the animosity, the characters of Benn/Eubank, a DVD of the first fight being made, the amount of people that tuned in, the list is endless

Eubank and Benn fought on cable so I imagine they were much bigger names..

Both bigger personalities too...

Benn-Eubank II got nearer 16 million tuning in. It was massive. Where I watched it, there was a fight in the pub when the result was announced such was the strength of feeling it created.

It's probably more akin to Eubank-Watson though as there were any number of people who though Watson had won the first fight (I don't think he did enough in the first half personally) but Watson also campaigned for a rematch and Eubank laid into Watson in the build-up labelling him "pitiful"

We all know the outcome of that fight but the verbals from Eubank drove Watson onto superhuman efforts that night and he gave Eubank 12 different kinds of Hell. Froch may try and do the same to Groves

Watson was a proud warrior who always gave beyond the call..

The Mccallum effort was staggering and I'm sure that beating contributed to his injury

Great battle..Underrated fighter..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Watson was a proud warrior who always gave beyond the call..

The Mccallum effort was staggering and I'm sure that beating contributed to his injury

Great battle..Underrated fighter..

Here here. McCallum said he was the strongest fighter he'd ever faced and labelled the fight as hell. Needs to be remembered for more one tragic fight.

And for me Froch V Groves doesn't compare to Eubank v Benn, the latter 2 simply hated each other and every man and their dog and an opinion and who they were backing.

This fight is still going to be massive though, will break records

Nowhere near as big as Benn v Eubanks or Eubanks v Watson.
Still a huge fight though, hope Groves can smash him into retirement.

I'd pick Watson to do a number on Froch personally

The Benn vs Eubank rematch attracted a live gate of over 40, 000 and tallied 16.3 million viewers for ITV on a prime time Saturday evening slot; there was even a star-studded preview show preceding it (hosted by Jonathan Ross).
 
I'm not sure Sky actually released the PPV numbers for the first Groves vs Froch battle (rumoured at about 125k buys -- Benn vs Eubank 2 was free-to-air, of course).
 
The first Froch-Groves fight was at the MEN (capacity 21k) but they're also looking at football stadium for the rematch. I'm not sure they'll outsell Benn and Eubank, though, due to the ticket prices, which aren't likely to be cheap.
 
If the rematch was shown free on terrestrial TV, I'm sure they'd do big numbers (I'm not sure anyone could match 16.3 million these days, though, due to the choice of channels now at everyone's disposal).
 
The Benn vs Eubank rivalry was a monster, though; it was ingrained on the nation's consciousness as both fighters were built up on terrestrial TV (some of us grew up with them). Everytime they fought, they'd market the rematch in their post-fight interview.
 
It was a collossal event and not one I imagine will be bettered (certainly domestically) in boxing's current climate.

So long as the Froch/Groves rematch is a better fight, I'm not bothered about how much publicity it attracts. For all the hoopla, the Benn-Eubank rematch was a bit of a stinker. After the savagery of their first bout they were both wary of one another and it became an ugly mauling affair that rarely sprung into life (like Morales and Barrera they simply couldn't sustain the ferocity).

DAVE667 wrote:So long as the Froch/Groves rematch is a better fight, I'm not bothered about how much publicity it attracts. For all the hoopla, the Benn-Eubank rematch was a bit of a stinker. After the savagery of their first bout they were both wary of one another and it became an ugly mauling affair that rarely sprung into life (like Morales and Barrera they simply couldn't sustain the ferocity).

Benn knew he couldn't fight as he had first time around -- Eubank's chin was iron and he'd eventually tire.

He'd roped in Jimmy Tibbs and gone back to basics -- boxing behind his jab. He also smothered Eubank well up close. Enough to nick the fight on most cards.

The winner was contracted to face Michael Nunn. Barry Hearn was man sausage-a-hoop with the draw. Don King was left fuming.

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:So long as the Froch/Groves rematch is a better fight, I'm not bothered about how much publicity it attracts. For all the hoopla, the Benn-Eubank rematch was a bit of a stinker. After the savagery of their first bout they were both wary of one another and it became an ugly mauling affair that rarely sprung into life (like Morales and Barrera they simply couldn't sustain the ferocity).

Benn knew he couldn't fight as he had first time around -- Eubank's chin was iron and he'd eventually tire.

He'd roped in Jimmy Tibbs and gone back to basics -- boxing behind his jab. He also smothered Eubank well up close. Enough to nick the fight on most cards.

The winner was contracted to face Michael Nunn. Barry Hearn was man sausage-a-hoop with the draw. Don King was left fuming.

I had Benn winning the rematch (but then I'm a fan of his anyway so I was massively biased). People forget Benn was decent boxer when he wanted to be...he just didn't want to be. Like Hatton after him, he realised the all-action style attracted more fans.

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:So long as the Froch/Groves rematch is a better fight, I'm not bothered about how much publicity it attracts. For all the hoopla, the Benn-Eubank rematch was a bit of a stinker. After the savagery of their first bout they were both wary of one another and it became an ugly mauling affair that rarely sprung into life (like Morales and Barrera they simply couldn't sustain the ferocity).

Benn knew he couldn't fight as he had first time around -- Eubank's chin was iron and he'd eventually tire.

He'd roped in Jimmy Tibbs and gone back to basics -- boxing behind his jab. He also smothered Eubank well up close. Enough to nick the fight on most cards.

The winner was contracted to face Michael Nunn. Barry Hearn was man sausage-a-hoop with the draw. Don King was left fuming.

Best intervention by the profanity filter I've seen in some time.

hahaha

In that case...That knockdown from Groves had Froch all man sausage-eyed

There were a few fights in British rings back in the early 90s that were probably bigger than Froch-Groves II, whether as a result of larger than life personalities, terrestrial coverage, the tangible prize at stake or something else. The middleweight triangle has already been spoken about, but there was also Lewis-Bruno, which came in the marquee division and was a much bigger fight than Froch-Groves II.

Going back a year or two more, you had McGuigan-McDonnell, which was huge at the time and had some similarities with the one to come in May. Old lion versus young gun, bragging rights and a fair bit of needle as the fight approached, although not the previous controversial history. Back another four or five years and there was Kaylor-Christie, which featured probably the nastiest build-up I ever saw for a fight, Hagler-Minter not excluded, full of racist overtones, but a massive seller.

This one is arguably the most significant fight between two Britons since those days, but that's entirely because of Groves' performance first time round and the controversial nature of its ending. The mutual "hatred" doesn't get close to the genuine searing animosity of one or two of the earlier fights, nor does it carry the same global significance as some of them and it will be seen by a fraction of the audience across the country.

A big fight, then, but these things are all relative. It's good that the British sporting public will be talking about boxing for a change, rather than the apparently endless football cycle.

Are Superfly and Shah the same person. Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

As long as Groves can back Froch up who cares..

That's just a man sausage and bull story Dave

Kaylor and Christie was nasty captain. Not a bad fight while it lasted. Unfortunate that it showed that Christie could be felled by a passing breeze. Shame, like many, I had high hopes for him.

Was Christie as highly thought of as Herol....

Christie was reckoned by some to be the most gifted all-round boxer that Britain had ever produced at that point, Truss. The halo had already slipped by the time of the Kaylor fight, though, since Errol had been smashed to bits by a hard-hitting, but limited, Belgian light-heavyweight called Jose Seys.

Not long after that, Graham made Seys look stupid in their contest, beating him with the greatest of ease and I think that it was only then that people really wised up about Herol and how good he actually was, for all his previous titles and wins against granite guys like Holmes and Hunter Clay. It then became pretty clear to everyone that he was much the best British middleweight around, better than Sibson, who steered way clear of Graham, and certainly better than a guy who had everything but the rather important attribute of a chin stronger than spun glass.

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

... That's about the gist of it. Christie was a stellar amateur, many of us turned a blind eye to the seys defeat, hoping to pass it off as a one-off but the Kaylor fight ended any delusions.

Will endeavour to watch some of his fights

cheers guys.

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

DAVE667 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

Dont forget the groping as well. Lovely as Superflyweight is I wouldn't be caught dead groping him.

Anyone taking their good lady out this evening for mansausage tails?

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

Dont forget the groping as well. Lovely as Superflyweight is I wouldn't be caught dead groping him.

Ah, but would you consider groping him when he was dead?

superflyweight wrote:Anyone taking their good lady out this evening for mansausage tails?  

No...but I am taking my wife!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   

Does anyone know the press cards from the second fight? I was only young at the time but I had Benn winning it tight but clear.

DAVE667 wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

Dont forget the groping as well. Lovely as Superflyweight is I wouldn't be caught dead groping him.

Ah, but would you consider groping him when he was dead?

No, not because of any aversion to the thought but strongback will arrive and point at superflyweight, screaming triumphantly, WHERES YOUR *reads whats written on the palm of his hand* PASOODO INTELLECT NOW. AHAHAHAH.

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

Dont forget the groping as well. Lovely as Superflyweight is I wouldn't be caught dead groping him.

Ah, but would you consider groping him when he was dead?

No, not because of any aversion to the thought but strongback will arrive and point at superflyweight, screaming triumphantly, WHERES YOUR *reads whats written on the palm of his hand* PASOODO INTELLECT NOW. AHAHAHAH.

Is he confusing PASSOOODO with PAAEEEEDO?

DAVE667 wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

Careful, Shah, or you'll also be tarred with the "pseudo-intellectual" brush.

Only time "Shah" and "intellectual" ever get mentioned in the same sentence outside of a police report into the savage beating of an intellectual

Dont forget the groping as well. Lovely as Superflyweight is I wouldn't be caught dead groping him.

Ah, but would you consider groping him when he was dead?

No, not because of any aversion to the thought but strongback will arrive and point at superflyweight, screaming triumphantly, WHERES YOUR *reads whats written on the palm of his hand* PASOODO INTELLECT NOW. AHAHAHAH.

Is he confusing PASSOOODO with PAAEEEEDO?

No dave - he's confusing it with Pseudo. The Paedo part goes without saying.

spencerclarke wrote:Does anyone know the press cards from the second fight?  I was only young at the time but I had Benn winning it tight but clear.

Think the consensus was benn was unlucky spencer. I was cheering for Eubank but thought you had to favour him in the close rounds to get a draw. Not a travesty by any means, but benn did enough to get it on most cards.

Bu the time It takes her to get ready these days I might book the table for midnight..

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

No, it was an observation. Nobody likes a lick ass.

Strongback wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

No, it was an observation.  Nobody likes a lick ass.

Not a fan of rimming, Strongy?

superflyweight wrote:

Strongback wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Strongback wrote:Are Superfly and Shah the same person.  Shah seems to follow SFW around backing him up and laughing at his jokes.

Did that make you feel important?

No, it was an observation.  Nobody likes a lick ass.

Not a fan of rimming, Strongy?  

Certainly not.

I had Benn by a fairly large points win in the rematch, although the fight and the individual rounds were tight and very competitive he had a highly work rate and landed the cleaner punches in nearly all the close rounds. To be honest i dont think Benn was ever going to get that title without KOing Eubanks, like a few times before Eubanks got the very kind treatment from the judges and won more rounds without doing much than any fighter i can remember. Barry Hearn and matchroom then and now seem good people to have on your side if you want to hold onto your title on a bad night.

Benn v Eubank was by far the bigger fight.

And you can thank Eubanks for that. People brought into the man of the manner style and that accent.

Though he lost a close decision to Collins

Some truth there Hogey. I've argued against the idea that some guys fight down to the level of their opponents but if anyone ever did it, it was Eubank. Certainly he was happy to just do enough and got the benefit of the doubt with the judges in some low key fights against guys not fit to lace his boots.

don't think that anyone's mentioned it, but Benn would have won had he not been docked a point for a low blow, so the general consensus of Benn winning by a round was about right.

As a small aside, on "Ringside" recently Nigel Benn was asked about the fight and said, "well ,I got to keep my belt,I was pretty happy with the outcome" which I was surprised by,as I recall him harping on about it for some time afterwards.Funny that him and Eubank seem to be genuinely great mates now.

Froch Groves 1 sold out the MEN (21,000) in around 10 minutes. They reckon this will do around 60,000 in a stadium, this fight is bigger than the first also. It isn't bigger than Benn/Eubank 2 purely because of the climate we live in now with so many channels and because its PPV not free to air.