Carl Froch retires, no Golovkin fight

By Boxing News - 07/14/2015 - Comments

By Scott Gilfoid: After enticing the boxing world with the possibility of fighting unbeaten knockout artist Gennady Golovkin in a fight that would have made millions, former IBF/WBA/WBC super middleweight champion Carl Froch (33-2, 24 KOs) has opted to retire rather than stay on and take a fight that would have been a risky one but very profitable. The 38-year-old Froch announced his retirement today on his Twitter account, saying that he’s “officially retired.”

The retirement wasn’t all that surprising though because Froch made a great deal of money in his last two fights against domestic fighter George Groves, and it appeared that after beating that untested and unproven fighter that Froch lost his desire for the game. To be sure, had Froch continued to fight he would have had to face arguably much bigger tests than Groves. Froch couldn’t rest on his laurels had he continued because there are clearly better fighters in the super middleweight division than Groves right now, and the boxing public would have wondered by Froch wasn’t fighting them. If he did fight them, he might have lost repeatedly, which is why it’s better that Froch retires now rather than taste the bitter taste of defeat again and again.

“I’m incredibly proud of what I have achieved in boxing but now is the right moment to hang up my gloves,” Froch said via Skysports.com. “I have nothing left to prove and my legacy speaks for itself.”

Froch actually has a lot to still prove. As far as his legacy goes, it’s obviously a mixed bag. It’s a fighter who still had a ton of question marks left over due to his loss to Andre Ward in the Super Six tournament, his controversial win over Andre Dirrell in 2009 in a fight that many boxing fans saw Froch losing, and the fact that Froch failed to face Golovkin. Right now, I doubt that Froch will get into the Boxing Hall of Fame off of what he accomplished during his career. Froch says his “legacy speaks for itself,” and it does speak for itself. In my view, it shows that Froch failed to beat the top guys during his career. You can’t count Froch’s win over Mikkel Kessler in their rematch as meaningful because he beat a shot Kessler who was at the very end of his career and didn’t look motivated. We saw what Kessler did in 2010 in beating Froch while he still was relatively in his prime. It wasn’t the same Kessler that Joe Calzaghe beat years earlier, but still more than a good enough Kessler to beat Froch.

Froch will now be working with Sky Sports.

“Sky Sports is the home of boxing and has followed me throughout my career,” Froch said. “I can’t wait to join the team and help bring fans the best fighters, the best contests and the best analysis.”

Froch’s best wins came against Lucian Bute, Arthur Abraham, Groves, Jermain Taylor and Jean Pasal. Bute was up there in age, and Taylor wasn’t the same fighter he’d been earlier in his career in 2005, before he’d been knocked out by Kelly Pavlik. Bute wasn’t the same fighter who had won the IBF title and dominated during his best years. Like I said, you can’t count Froch’s wins over Kessler and Dirrell because they were tainted. Dirrell appeared to beat Froch in a fight that took place in Froch’s hometown of Nottingham, UK in what some boxing fans called the “Robbery of the century.” Froch did not get the best Kessler in 2013. He got the worst in my opinion, and for that reason I don’t count the win.

The one fight that Froch could have taken that would have really shaped his legacy was a fight against Golovkin, and Froch chose to retire instead of sticking around to take the fight. Some boxing fans will now say that Golovkin retired Froch by putting him behind the eight ball to where if he continued to fight, he would have faced enormous pressure to fight him. I don’t know what to think. I do know that if Froch continued to fight, he would have looked really, really bad if he chose to go in another direction and fight someone else other than Golovkin like James DeGale or Julio Chavez Jr.

It’s a pity that Froch didn’t stick around to fight Golovkin because as far as I’m concerned, Froch’s legacy absolutely needed a win in that fight for him to have really achieved anything with his career. Without a win over Golovkin, I couldn’t vote Froch into the Boxing Hall of Fame. His best wins were over flawed fighters. Froch never fought rematches with Ward and Dirrell, when it was something that the boxing public wanted him to do. When a fighter gets beaten by someone or when they win controversial decisions, they fight them again in rematches. Froch never did this and you have to wonder why. Boxing greats like Lennox Lewis avenged his defeats at the hands of Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahmam. That’s true sign of greatness when you’re willing to try and avenge your defeats and/or controversial wins. Froch did do that, did he? No rematch with Dirrell, no rematch with Ward, and no fight with Golovkin. As such, I don’t see Froch’s legacy as being meaningful. I see his career as being more of Arthur Abraham and Felix Sturm type career rather than the career of a great fighter.



Comments are closed.