Official Super Six Follow Live Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

I think you guys are overestimating the 'robbery'

The first 8 or 9 rounds ok Froch looked awkward but what did Dirrell do apart from dodge punches?

It WAS a close fight imo, kind of like the first Sam Peter James Toney fight.

Dirrell was techinically much better and landed the better shots, but about three quarters of the fight was Froch pressing which obviosly is worth something.

The point was bullshit though, not sure if that affected the scores, I dont think it does as Froch had two 115-113 but it shouldnt have happened.

Dirrell can leave feeling he gave a good performance but too timid, Froch needs to work on a LOT though and can count himself very lucky tonight.

Dirrell is a CLASS ACT in the post fight interview though, I really hope he can bounce back from this.

---

A perfect example of why computer scoring wouldn't work even by your standards. No way Froch outlanded Dirrell.

---

My suggestion of computer scoring was to prevent crazy robberies where one fighter clearly won according to the rest of the world but was robbed by blind or corrupt judges.

If the computer gave the fight to Dirrell on accuracy here who would complain? It was a very close that could have gone either way.

My argument wasn't that a computer would be more accurate in all cases but more consistently accurate over the majority of the cases, and where it would have problems would be in very close fights such as this where ultimately it doesnt matter which side it chooses.

A computer would have a certain bias its true but judges have waaaaaaay more.


You had 100 fights judged by a computer and 100 the traditional way my bet is you would have far less fans crying robbery in the computer scoring fights.

However I think MORE fighters might complain if the computer was judge, easier to say they were robbed by silicon than a man.....

---

You would be hard pressed to find more than two rounds that Froch outlanded Dirrell you would have scorecards reading 117-110 Dirrell (because of the point deduction). I challenge you to find anyone that would say that was a fair judgement of the fight. Impact matters, aggression matters, all of the things that a computer would be unable to calculate. So it doesn't solve the robbery cries that tend to follow pretty much every decision nowadays.

one positive thing...


i like antonio tarver as a commentator




sadly i expect there a real good chance andre ward will be robbed real badly too


and its gonna be real hard for dirrell to get a decision in germany

Boxing judging once again sucks. Fuck ya all. Im going to go play Farmville.

:fyou:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

I think you guys are overestimating the 'robbery'

The first 8 or 9 rounds ok Froch looked awkward but what did Dirrell do apart from dodge punches?

It WAS a close fight imo, kind of like the first Sam Peter James Toney fight.

Dirrell was techinically much better and landed the better shots, but about three quarters of the fight was Froch pressing which obviosly is worth something.

The point was bullshit though, not sure if that affected the scores, I dont think it does as Froch had two 115-113 but it shouldnt have happened.

Dirrell can leave feeling he gave a good performance but too timid, Froch needs to work on a LOT though and can count himself very lucky tonight.

Dirrell is a CLASS ACT in the post fight interview though, I really hope he can bounce back from this.

---

What rounds did you score for Froch?

---

I didn't score it on a round by round but I never felt any rounds were really decisive.

I think there is a lot of Froch hate on the boards and a lot of attention on his ugly fighting style and looking awkward against fast, slick opponents.

He certainly DID look awkward and missed wildly at time but at the same time Froch made the fight. He was constantly coming forward and throwing punches, and Dirrell mostly dodged and held on. He only came back with anything later in the fight, the championship rounds.

Let me ask you this, if one fighter comes forward for a whole round, throws punches and misses, but the other fighter doesn't come forward at all, and just dodged, who wins the round?

That is the question really, yes Dirrell made Froch look bad at times but he didn't do anything offensively himself in most of the rounds.

In such cases I guess two of the judges went for the fighter who was at least pressing the action and throwing punches.

I don't think it was a robbery, I think it could have gone either way.

Dirrell was a class act after the fight, Froch did what every puncher did after the fight and blamed his erratic style on his opponent's running.

Clearly the commentators, the judges and the other ringside reporters judging all scored it a very very close fight.

Opinions on here tend to be biased a bit and I think people have overreacted a bit on the robbery.

If Dirrell would have won it would have been totally fair though as well. Close fight.

---

At last someone that talks sense, I did not enjoy the fight and thought that scoring it would be extremely difficult. Personally I didn't have Carl winning (I had it 114-114) but I'm not surprised it went the way it did as he was the defending champion.

P.s And I am a Froch fan!

Dirrell clearly deserved the fight imo.

Although Dirrell clinched often what Froch was doing in the clinches was far worse with his rabbit punching and using his elbows, he also starting practicing his judo half way through the fight :)

Besides the rough tatics, clinching, etc Dirrell did land the cleaner shots throughout the fight and was the busier fighter in the early parts of the fight and he clearly won the late rounds. Froch landed about two clean punches the whole night, a very bad performance by Carl.

Shit I just woke up! Did I totally miss everything?? :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SalTheButcher

one positive thing...


i like antonio tarver as a commentator




sadly i expect there a real good chance andre ward will be robbed real badly too


and its gonna be real hard for dirrell to get a decision in germany

---

ward will be fighting in oakland

what a sh1t fight, Dirrell should have got the nod but then again he only has himself to blame for not throwing more, he had no trouble hitting Froch but choose to run and hold :confused: both these guys are getting ko'd next round

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

A perfect example of why computer scoring wouldn't work even by your standards. No way Froch outlanded Dirrell.

---

My suggestion of computer scoring was to prevent crazy robberies where one fighter clearly won according to the rest of the world but was robbed by blind or corrupt judges.

If the computer gave the fight to Dirrell on accuracy here who would complain? It was a very close that could have gone either way.

My argument wasn't that a computer would be more accurate in all cases but more consistently accurate over the majority of the cases, and where it would have problems would be in very close fights such as this where ultimately it doesnt matter which side it chooses.

A computer would have a certain bias its true but judges have waaaaaaay more.


You had 100 fights judged by a computer and 100 the traditional way my bet is you would have far less fans crying robbery in the computer scoring fights.

However I think MORE fighters might complain if the computer was judge, easier to say they were robbed by silicon than a man.....

---

You would be hard pressed to find more than two rounds that Froch outlanded Dirrell you would have scorecards reading 117-110 Dirrell (because of the point deduction). I challenge you to find anyone that would say that was a fair judgement of the fight. Impact matters, aggression matters, all of the things that a computer would be unable to calculate. So it doesn't solve the robbery cries that tend to follow pretty much every decision nowadays.

---

Well most on here would here would think scores of 117-110 Dirrell would be highly accurate it seems ;D

Anway I think you underestimate what computers could potentially do. Why do you assume they couldn't calculate aggression and other subtle things relating to the fight?

A computer is capable of much more than just registering whether a punch lands like, like some kind of counter.

They can do all kinds of things with computers these days and if research was put into it I bet they could in time make a computer that virtually removed the subjective aspect of scoring entirely.

They could track who pressed the most and who was backed up as easily as they can track possession times in a football video game, motion cameras and sensors could be set up, all kinds of data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomcy03

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

What rounds did you score for Froch?

---

I didn't score it on a round by round but I never felt any rounds were really decisive.

I think there is a lot of Froch hate on the boards and a lot of attention on his ugly fighting style and looking awkward against fast, slick opponents.

He certainly DID look awkward and missed wildly at time but at the same time Froch made the fight. He was constantly coming forward and throwing punches, and Dirrell mostly dodged and held on. He only came back with anything later in the fight, the championship rounds.

Let me ask you this, if one fighter comes forward for a whole round, throws punches and misses, but the other fighter doesn't come forward at all, and just dodged, who wins the round?

That is the question really, yes Dirrell made Froch look bad at times but he didn't do anything offensively himself in most of the rounds.

In such cases I guess two of the judges went for the fighter who was at least pressing the action and throwing punches.

I don't think it was a robbery, I think it could have gone either way.

Dirrell was a class act after the fight, Froch did what every puncher did after the fight and blamed his erratic style on his opponent's running.

Clearly the commentators, the judges and the other ringside reporters judging all scored it a very very close fight.

Opinions on here tend to be biased a bit and I think people have overreacted a bit on the robbery.

If Dirrell would have won it would have been totally fair though as well. Close fight.

---

At last someone that talks sense, I did not enjoy the fight and thought that scoring it would be extremely difficult. Personally I didn't have Carl winning (I had it 114-114) but I'm not surprised it went the way it did as he was the defending champion.

P.s And I am a Froch fan!

---

Then you did have Froch winning 114-113 or did you have an even round? Don't forget the point deduction

Dirrell should've won. But a lot of things come down to how well you present yourself, and its true you dont win belts with a cry baby attitude.

I think Dirrell will own the division in a few years anyway. He looks like p4p material.

I see noway Froch was winnin this fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

My suggestion of computer scoring was to prevent crazy robberies where one fighter clearly won according to the rest of the world but was robbed by blind or corrupt judges.

If the computer gave the fight to Dirrell on accuracy here who would complain? It was a very close that could have gone either way.

My argument wasn't that a computer would be more accurate in all cases but more consistently accurate over the majority of the cases, and where it would have problems would be in very close fights such as this where ultimately it doesnt matter which side it chooses.

A computer would have a certain bias its true but judges have waaaaaaay more.


You had 100 fights judged by a computer and 100 the traditional way my bet is you would have far less fans crying robbery in the computer scoring fights.

However I think MORE fighters might complain if the computer was judge, easier to say they were robbed by silicon than a man.....

---

You would be hard pressed to find more than two rounds that Froch outlanded Dirrell you would have scorecards reading 117-110 Dirrell (because of the point deduction). I challenge you to find anyone that would say that was a fair judgement of the fight. Impact matters, aggression matters, all of the things that a computer would be unable to calculate. So it doesn't solve the robbery cries that tend to follow pretty much every decision nowadays.

---

Well most on here would here would think scores of 117-110 Dirrell would be highly accurate it seems ;D

Anway I think you underestimate what computers could potentially do. Why do you assume they couldn't calculate aggression and other subtle things relating to the fight?

A computer is capable of much more than just registering whether a punch lands like, like some kind of counter.

They can do all kinds of things with computers these days and if research was put into it I bet they could in time make a computer that virtually removed the subjective aspect of scoring entirely.

They could track who pressed the most and who was backed up as easily as they can track possession times in a football video game, motion cameras and sensors could be set up, all kinds of data.

---

Dirrell 117-110 would of been the right score if no judges were in the pocket

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SalTheButcher

one positive thing...


i like antonio tarver as a commentator




sadly i expect there a real good chance andre ward will be robbed real badly too


and its gonna be real hard for dirrell to get a decision in germany

---

From what I saw, it will be very hard for Dirrell to get a decision anywhere against Abraham.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

My suggestion of computer scoring was to prevent crazy robberies where one fighter clearly won according to the rest of the world but was robbed by blind or corrupt judges.

If the computer gave the fight to Dirrell on accuracy here who would complain? It was a very close that could have gone either way.

My argument wasn't that a computer would be more accurate in all cases but more consistently accurate over the majority of the cases, and where it would have problems would be in very close fights such as this where ultimately it doesnt matter which side it chooses.

A computer would have a certain bias its true but judges have waaaaaaay more.


You had 100 fights judged by a computer and 100 the traditional way my bet is you would have far less fans crying robbery in the computer scoring fights.

However I think MORE fighters might complain if the computer was judge, easier to say they were robbed by silicon than a man.....

---

You would be hard pressed to find more than two rounds that Froch outlanded Dirrell you would have scorecards reading 117-110 Dirrell (because of the point deduction). I challenge you to find anyone that would say that was a fair judgement of the fight. Impact matters, aggression matters, all of the things that a computer would be unable to calculate. So it doesn't solve the robbery cries that tend to follow pretty much every decision nowadays.

---

Well most on here would here would think scores of 117-110 Dirrell would be highly accurate it seems ;D

Anway I think you underestimate what computers could potentially do. Why do you assume they couldn't calculate aggression and other subtle things relating to the fight?

A computer is capable of much more than just registering whether a punch lands like, like some kind of counter.

They can do all kinds of things with computers these days and if research was put into it I bet they could in time make a computer that virtually removed the subjective aspect of scoring entirely.

They could track who pressed the most and who was backed up as easily as they can track possession times in a football video game, motion cameras and sensors could be set up, all kinds of data.

---

Because I make sensors that feed data to computers for a living and am quite aware of what is possible, I attend annual conferences so hardware engineers can discuss what is on the "cutting edge" and what they hope to achieve with new said technologies. I think you overestimate what is possible what you are talking about is unrealistic by today's standards.