Breidis Prescott vs Kevin Mitchell

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tysonbruno

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tysonbruno

All Mitchell did was run round ring did he really do enough to win?? it was all a bit dodgy to me Ref was on at Breidis from the start basically for nothing Breidis was the one pressing the action he threw loads more punches and also Jim watt was only really comenting on Kevin Mitchell. and the scores were ridiculous maybe i need to watch it again but i wouldn't have been shocked if Prescott had won.

Why am I not surprised you can't score a fight ;D

You do realise you have to land punches to score, right?

Prescott threw 400 punches - landed 40. Mitchell threw 300 - landed 100.

Look i know it looks like im hating on him but look at it like this many believe Froch beat Dirrell because Dirrell was to negative but he landed more than Mitchell and looked more effective than Mitchell too look at it like this had Prescott stopped chasing and stud in middle of ring then the action would have stopped. FACT.;)

1. Mitchell landed over 50% more punches than Prescott. And if coming forward winging predictable haymakers, that miss by miles, is looking more effective then yes Prescott looked great. Most, like everyone in the world bar you and Otley, saw the better boxer by miles looking more effective.

2. Had Prescott stood still in the middle of the ring Mitchell would have put him in hospital.

3. It was nothing like Froch-Dirrell. Dirrell out punched Froch but lost because he had the home crowd against him and gave off the aura of a loser - by constantly moaning, holding and diving on the floor. ;)