Printable View
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter
but the other two i don't think can be questioned with the same authority; is it Froch's lack of power or Dirrell's good chin?... Froch didn't touch the canvas, and was stunned once, maybe twice in the fight and recovered well...and AGAIN, didn't go down.
Getting wobbled by a good punch means you have a suspect chin?
Quote:
Originally Posted by skel1983
I'm an American, and I thought Dirrell fought like a girl until the 11th round... had he fought like that the whole time, it would have been a one sided mollywopping...but he didn't. He looked like fucking John Ruiz.
Allan Greene sucks too, but he's good for the Andre's (someone they can beat, or a good gatekeeper). Where's Lucian Bute?
[quote=Fenster;799670]Sorry - I cant trust you on this one even if you are the former Saddo Prediction Comp Champion-FACT.......Froch did land cleanly on Dirrell and Froch's punches didnt hurt dirrell. I saw it with my own two eyes.....When Dirrell landed to Froch's noggin, he started to stagger around like a high schooler after doing his first beer bong...Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterI'm saying if Froch had hit him he may have hurt him. Trust me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
[quote=Fenster;799670];DQuote:
Originally Posted by HunterI'm saying if Froch had hit him he may have hurt him. Trust me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
i think Kessler v Froch will be one of the best of the tourney, because of the points you bring up...Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by amat
haha that made me laugh. What has been missing from Froch's last three fights though has been the uppercut. Prior to the Pascal fight his trademark was to hang his hands low, invite his opponent to come in and then sucker them with a devastating uppercut, it was beautiful to see.
His last few fights he's not had the opportunity, partly I think because his opponents don't ever want to come to him, and partly because against fighters better than our domestic plodders he looks he's punching in water.
The on factor in Froch's favour is that the old sayings are speed kills and the better, faster boxer will beat the brawler type etc. Well Froch in last two fights has fought the two fastest, slickest fighters he may ever face and he's still unbeaten which means something.
Its a bit like Chavez really, he was completely outboxed by Meldrick Taylor in the first fight but caught up with him late, and battered him in the rematch.
Froch may be that kind of fighter (not saying he is as good, just the type of fighter he is).
I look forward immensely to his fight with Kessler. On paper Kessler does everything right whereas Froch does everything wrong so Kessler should win it easily.
But he won't be running like the others so maybe Froch can get into more....
I wouldn't write him off yet, although I have little doubt that Andre Ward will win the tournament.
although, at this point I don't think Abraham would take any every rounds off and would go right after Froch and would beat him inside of 5 or 6 rounds...
that also would be another very interesting fight.
[quote=Fenster;799670]Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterI'm saying if Froch had hit him he may have hurt him. Trust me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Great video, still doesn't explain what Froch did to win, but great video.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Are you going to show another that counts rabbit punches?
Of course the judges aren't there to count clinches, that's the refs job.
I agree that direll deseved to loose but not because he was beat, but because when you let it go to the cards you take it out of your hands and put it into the hands of people who you have no idea what their real intentions are. Props to froch cause the scoreboard is all that matters. But me and a couple of guys watched the fight again with no sound (an idea i got from nate cambell) and i'm no expert but the fight in that way didn't even look close. Direll runs, mayweather uses elbows, bradley his head, margarito cement basically i'm sayin you can't take away punches landed from a guy for the way he lands them. It should be like a video game a point is a point. So those saying direll lost and should have cause of the way he fought out there, i have to disagree. Why even keep score if we are going to get results like this. But hey if froch can keep winning and win this whole thing it won't matter how, it's all about the scoreboard after. If this were a street fight then i'd say maybe froch did enough to make it even, but who was the best boxer in this sport called boxing, no way he won.
For sure - if someone makes one.Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepGreat video, still doesn't explain what Froch did to win, but great video.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Are you going to show another that counts rabbit punches?
Of course the judges aren't there to count clinches, that's the refs job.
Remember I think Dirrell WON!!! ;)
i think both deserved to lose. direll would have picked froch apart but he chose to run and hug and when he was landing his punches he would stop and hug. i mean come on.. he was trying to play it safe like a scared little girl. froch on the other hand didnt pressure like he's supposed to. bottomline is that both of them belong to the bottom of the super six along with taylor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Dirrell ran and clinched but still managed to outland Froch and outthrow Froch in majority of the rounds.
Froch landed about three clean punches the whole night, although he did land alot of rabbit punches, unforenately for Froch, they are illegal. :)
Hunter gave you an answer, if Froch would have tried that uppercut against any of the guys in this tournament then that would spell very bad for him. I literally laughed when people raved about his uppercut in the past, by ditching it Froch showed he wasn't as stupid as perhaps I thought he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by amat
haha that made me laugh. What has been missing from Froch's last three fights though has been the uppercut. Prior to the Pascal fight his trademark was to hang his hands low, invite his opponent to come in and then sucker them with a devastating uppercut, it was beautiful to see.
His last few fights he's not had the opportunity, partly I think because his opponents don't ever want to come to him, and partly because against fighters better than our domestic plodders he looks he's punching in water.
The on factor in Froch's favour is that the old sayings are speed kills and the better, faster boxer will beat the brawler type etc. Well Froch in last two fights has fought the two fastest, slickest fighters he may ever face and he's still unbeaten which means something.
Its a bit like Chavez really, he was completely outboxed by Meldrick Taylor in the first fight but caught up with him late, and battered him in the rematch.
Froch may be that kind of fighter (not saying he is as good, just the type of fighter he is).
I look forward immensely to his fight with Kessler. On paper Kessler does everything right whereas Froch does everything wrong so Kessler should win it easily.
But he won't be running like the others so maybe Froch can get into more....
I wouldn't write him off yet, although I have little doubt that Andre Ward will win the tournament.
I am SHOCKED by the backlash. To think that Juan Diaz got all the shit he got for beating Malignaggi and for the judges getting the scores RIGHT, and the backlash has been all negative towards Dirrell not Froch. I guess Dirrell can take solace in the fact that he is the better fighter but he is a bit of a...character so maybe he won't. I didn't think my dislike for Froch could be escalated. He should move to MMA.
;DQuote:
Originally Posted by switch-hitterThat comment shows your lack of brain cells.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
It doesn't actually but that's besides the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Your kidding right??