Simple - if you watched the fight properly and scored it, who did you have winning?
I had it 116-112 Dirrell and I want to see what the general consensus is as I thought it was a clear enough victory tbh.
Printable View
Simple - if you watched the fight properly and scored it, who did you have winning?
I had it 116-112 Dirrell and I want to see what the general consensus is as I thought it was a clear enough victory tbh.
I don't remember Froch landing one single decent shot. In fact I don't remember him landing any shot.
I had it 120-107 for Froch.
:lol: Dirrell 9-3 but a point taken off and I'm not good at math. Dirrell had more points.
Dirrell won by at least 4 rounds. I had Froch winning only two.
Froch landed one punch...I remember it clearly, Left Hook. It was about rd 8 or something, and the announcer and crowd went crazy like it was a mad spark out. Dirrell ran from it, but it was so slow, he came back thinking the coast was clear and BLAMMO...turns out it was still being thrown. :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
120-108 Froch not even close.
I ain't a Froch fan but of course I root for him, I thought he deserved the win because Dirrell just ran from the fight and tried to STEAL rounds. Four or five decent trades in some rounds and he had it in the bag because he looked good when he did stand and fight.
If anyone truly thinks he did enough to take the title they may need a new pair of eyes.
Explain what Froch was doing to win rounds because all I've seen from people saying Froch should have won is 'Dirrell didn't do enough to win'. Well if he didn't, then Froch DEFINITELY didn't. The whole point of the Super-Six is trying something to save boxing. You can't do that with bullshit hometown decisions & someone having to KO the champ to have any hope of getting his title. If this had happened to a British fighter going to the US, you would be calling it what it is - a robbery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Well direct me to the eye storeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell landed more punches
Dirrell's punches were cleaner, sharper, crisp and accurate
Dirrell was the better defender
Dirrell had froch on rubber legs 2x compared 0 times
Dirrell held and leaned a bit excessive.. Froch showed what a low class bush league cock he is with his fouling.. Desperate move by an absolute scrub of a fighter
Froch did fuck all but plod around as usual, swing for the fences fanning off the front row cause he couldnt hit water if he fell out of a boat..
Dirrell got fucked sideways and the idiots it the crowd were cheering when froch was swinging at the invisible man in the ring, cause Andre was nowere near when Carl the snail Froch loaded up.. He looked like an absolute bewildered clown, Mr confidence didnt look to sure of himself as he kneeled down with Dirrell in prayer, reminded me of how suprised Pac's face looked when the judges screwed JMM in their 2nd fight
Froch was trying to fight, as he always does, not falling to his knees to avoid getting hit and running about the place. It all goes on how you judge a fight too and for me.........Dirrell was avoiding a fight and trying to steal rounds. That's not pleasing to fans nor judges and certainly not the way to take a belt from a champion.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinExplain what Froch was doing to win rounds because all I've seen from people saying Froch should have won is 'Dirrell didn't do enough to win'. Well if he didn't, then Froch DEFINITELY didn't. The whole point of the Super-Six is trying something to save boxing. You can't do that with bullshit hometown decisions & someone having to KO the champ to have any hope of getting his title. If this had happened to a British fighter going to the US, you would be calling it what it is - a robbery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
I had Dirrell by at least 2 rounds! It wasn't pretty & he didn't do much but he did more than Froch!
I know the saying about taking the belt from the champ & Dirrell should have been more active at times especially considering it was in Froch's hometown but he won the fight imo
I replied to another blind man. Read thatQuote:
Originally Posted by JT RockWell direct me to the eye storeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell landed more punches
Dirrell's punches were cleaner, sharper, crisp and accurate
Dirrell was the better defender
Dirrell had froch on rubber legs 2x compared 0 times
Dirrell held and leaned a bit excessive.. Froch showed what a low class bush league cock he is with his fouling.. Desperate move by an absolute scrub of a fighter
Froch did fuck all but plod around as usual, swing for the fences fanning off the front row cause he couldnt hit water if he fell out of a boat..
Dirrell got fucked sideways and the idiots it the crowd were cheering when froch was swinging at the invisible man in the ring, cause Andre was nowere near when Carl the snail Froch loaded up.. He looked like an absolute bewildered clown, Mr confidence didnt look to sure of himself as he kneeled down with Dirrell in prayer, reminded me of how suprised Pac's face looked when the judges screwed JMM in their 2nd fight
I don't think you can even compare the two. That was a fight in which both guys gave their all & even though I thought JMM won, I can't call a Pac win a robbery, there were a lot of close rounds because both guys were doing a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT RockWell direct me to the eye storeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell landed more punches
Dirrell's punches were cleaner, sharper, crisp and accurate
Dirrell was the better defender
Dirrell had froch on rubber legs 2x compared 0 times
Dirrell held and leaned a bit excessive.. Froch showed what a low class bush league cock he is with his fouling.. Desperate move by an absolute scrub of a fighter
Froch did fuck all but plod around as usual, swing for the fences fanning off the front row cause he couldnt hit water if he fell out of a boat..
Dirrell got fucked sideways and the idiots it the crowd were cheering when froch was swinging at the invisible man in the ring, cause Andre was nowere near when Carl the snail Froch loaded up.. He looked like an absolute bewildered clown, Mr confidence didnt look to sure of himself as he kneeled down with Dirrell in prayer, reminded me of how suprised Pac's face looked when the judges screwed JMM in their 2nd fight
Froch-Dirrell had virtually no close rounds because one guy was doing very little & the other guy who got the win was doing absolutely FUCK ALL. I struggle to see this as even close. Massimo Barrovecchio & Daniel Van de Wiele will rank alongside Gale Van Hoye from now on in my judging shitlist.
Again, what did Froch do to win the rounds? Who was getting in the more effective punches & by what quantity?Quote:
Originally Posted by KelFroch was trying to fight, as he always does, not falling to his knees to avoid getting hit and running about the place. It all goes on how you judge a fight too and for me.........Dirrell was avoiding a fight and trying to steal rounds. That's not pleasing to fans nor judges and certainly not the way to take a belt from a champion.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinExplain what Froch was doing to win rounds because all I've seen from people saying Froch should have won is 'Dirrell didn't do enough to win'. Well if he didn't, then Froch DEFINITELY didn't. The whole point of the Super-Six is trying something to save boxing. You can't do that with bullshit hometown decisions & someone having to KO the champ to have any hope of getting his title. If this had happened to a British fighter going to the US, you would be calling it what it is - a robbery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Tell me what punches Froch was throwing & landing to justify him winning the fight. In fact, point out to me an example of effective aggression (walking forward doesn't count) where Froch was able to hurt Dirrell. Oh & nice work avoiding JT's points :rolleyes:
Neither guy deserved a win. They both stunk out the joint. They don't even deserve a draw for this debacle.
Like I said, Froch was going forward to fight and Dirrell did not want to fight back at times, I already said he was going to his knees to avoid fighting and running a lot. I have no doubt Dirrell landed more shots but when a fighter goes out of his way to NOT get involved by doing so the judges can't possibly favour him.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinAgain, what did Froch do to win the rounds? Who was getting in the more effective punches & by what quantity?Quote:
Originally Posted by KelFroch was trying to fight, as he always does, not falling to his knees to avoid getting hit and running about the place. It all goes on how you judge a fight too and for me.........Dirrell was avoiding a fight and trying to steal rounds. That's not pleasing to fans nor judges and certainly not the way to take a belt from a champion.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkin
Tell me what punches Froch was throwing & landing to justify him winning the fight. In fact, point out to me an example of effective aggression (walking forward doesn't count) where Froch was able to hurt Dirrell. Oh & nice work avoiding JT's points :rolleyes:
I respect your opinion mate as always but I stand by what I say.;)
I would like to know how anyone can say Froch won easily? Well, not even the bias judging had him win easily. With the one point deduction the two judges who "gave" it to Froch 115-112 had Froch winning by ONE swing round. That is as close as you can score a victory. Froch landed nothing. People who say Dirrell ran while Froch tried to stand in there and fight are just stating what any common boxing fan saw coming. Froch is a slugger and Dirrell is a pure boxer. Dirrell was not going to mix it up with Froch and Froch was not going to outbox Dirrell. Froch got outclassed made to look very slow and average. If Dirrell is "running" but landing when he throws even if its sparingly and Froch is just chasing, with no knowledge of how to cut the ring off, and landing absolutely no punches how does he win? Lets be realistic. How many punches did Froch land? If you still use your fingers then put your other hand down, its not needed. Heck, Dirrell even had Froch hurt and backed up at the end of 11th. I think its very fishy that there are no reported punchstats for this fight. I know people who wanted Froch to win will argue that you shouldn't be allowed to win if you're "running" then you definitely shouldn't be allowed to win if you're shadowboxing. This fight showed me things I already suspected. Dirrell was overwhelmed by the environment though he can win easily off atleticism which he did and Froch is really just an above average slow fighter with a lot of heart and conditioning who would've had no business being in the same ring with Calzaghe.
Its always hard to watch one boxer using the bicycle and the other maybe more willing to make it a fight,but being to incompetent cut the ring off...IMO Dirrell should have won,but it sure wasn't pretty...
And on a side note I want to say that I always hear alot of crap how bad scoring is in Germany and I always respond to it that its no worse than anywhere else...Froch vs Dirrell is a really good example for that ;)...
Going to his knees if the ref's job to avoid, not the judges perogative to base their decisions on. They are supposed to base it solely on the punching & aggression. I didn't like Dirrell doing that, but if the judges are watching that, they should also be watching for bodyslams & pushing an opponents neck onto the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Froch was moving forward as if to fight, but he never actually went ahead to do it. He spent as much of the first few rounds jabbing from a distance then darting away as Dirrell. When Froch got Dirrell in a corner, it was Dirrell who would force his way back out. If Froch had even been pressuring him into corners forcing him to cover up I could understand, but the simple fact is when that did happen, Froch opened himself up to a clinch or got out-punched back by Dirrell.
Dirrell clearly won the fight.
He may of clinched and ran but he did land the cleaner shots throughout the fight and in most of the rounds he was busier too.
Froch came forward but his aggression was not effective, he landed about two clean shots the whole night, coming forward isn't in the scoring criteria, you need to be landing your shots coming foward to be awarded points.
Froch can't be awarded the fight because he clinched less, simple as.
I didn't score it when it watched it and there's no way on earth I'm going to watch it again just to score it, but I had Dirrell winning. You couldn't objectively watch that fight and give it to Froch.
I'm sorry mate but you cannot award a fighter credit because he was coming forward and landing nothing where the other guy was moving back but landing shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelLike I said, Froch was going forward to fight and Dirrell did not want to fight back at times, I already said he was going to his knees to avoid fighting and running a lot. I have no doubt Dirrell landed more shots but when a fighter goes out of his way to NOT get involved by doing so the judges can't possibly favour him.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinAgain, what did Froch do to win the rounds? Who was getting in the more effective punches & by what quantity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Tell me what punches Froch was throwing & landing to justify him winning the fight. In fact, point out to me an example of effective aggression (walking forward doesn't count) where Froch was able to hurt Dirrell. Oh & nice work avoiding JT's points :rolleyes:
I respect your opinion mate as always but I stand by what I say.;)
You have to get kind of creative to score it for Froch don't you? I mean cause the old standby, landing punches, is a big NO.
I know you can't but like the others you don't address the falling to the knees shit, same as the Hopkins fans don't seem to remember Bernard clutching his balls like a fucking loser trying to steal the fight againsed Joe.Quote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticI'm sorry mate but you cannot award a fighter credit because he was coming forward and landing nothing where the other guy was moving back but landing shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelLike I said, Froch was going forward to fight and Dirrell did not want to fight back at times, I already said he was going to his knees to avoid fighting and running a lot. I have no doubt Dirrell landed more shots but when a fighter goes out of his way to NOT get involved by doing so the judges can't possibly favour him.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkin
I respect your opinion mate as always but I stand by what I say.;)
One guy wants to fight, the other tries to steal it by doing stupid shit like faking fouls and going to his knees. As a judge what the fucking hell would you do seriously?
"He is trying to get a point taken off Joe to win the fight, what genius"
"I like the guy who keeps falling to his knees to avoid shots, smart stuff"
Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
The perfect way to put it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyKickAss
I think that is why Froch fans are not so willing to see the Dirrell win. Dirrell was content with landing sparingly and having Froch shadowbox.
What has Bernard got to do with this ? We are talking about Dirrell - Froch.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelI know you can't but like the others you don't address the falling to the knees shit, same as the Hopkins fans don't seem to remember Bernard clutching his balls like a fucking loser trying to steal the fight againsed Joe.Quote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticI'm sorry mate but you cannot award a fighter credit because he was coming forward and landing nothing where the other guy was moving back but landing shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
One guy wants to fight, the other tries to steal it by doing stupid shit like faking fouls and going to his knees. As a judge what the fucking hell would you do seriously?
"He is trying to get a point taken off Joe to win the fight, what genius"
"I like the guy who keeps falling to his knees to avoid shots, smart stuff"
Dirrell wasn't faking anything, Froch fought a very dirty fight.
What Dirrell did like clinching etc shouldn't affect the scoring unless the ref takes action like deducting a point. Dirrell was still landing more and throwing more.
Based on the 4 scoring criterias in a fight:
Clean Effective Punching
Effective Aggression
Ring Generalship
Defense
Dirrell clearly won.
Kel,
You cant ignore the fact that Dirrell despite, running,clinching and falling to his knees managed to outclass Carl by a long shot in every category.
Accuracey
Volume
Crispness
Power Punches
Should I continue?
Froch looked like a drunken idiot, Carl couldnt cut off a piece of steak let alone a boxing ring... He is a disgrace of a champion and his brashness is so dickheaded he makes Pretty Boy Floyd seem like a road scholar
At least Mayweather has skill to back up his trash talking. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
You also don't hear Mayweather talking shit about an opponent he's just beat like Froch. I find it hard to believe that I was the only one put off by all that stuff about Dirrell being a coward right after he got a gift against him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugilistic
None of that has anything to do with any of the scoring criteria. That is the referee's job to deal with. A judge is there to address (again, even though others have posted it)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Who was landing the cleaner & more effective punches - Froch wasn't landing so this could only be Dirrell. In fact, Dirrell was never staggered, it was Froch who was hurt, particularly towards the end of 10th & 11th rounds.
Defensive skills - This was clearly Dirrell, who was barely hit as Froch 'came forward', in fact on the rare occasions Froch did connect with a shot, Dirrell would be right back at him with more. It's not hard to see who did better.
Effective aggression - Froch came forward, but he did nothing when coming forward. When Dirrell came forward he was landing punches, particularly working well to the body.
Ring generalship - I think the fact it didn't turn into a war & swingfest shows this was Dirrell again. He made Froch fight his fight & beat him handily at it. In fact the occasions when he did get involved in Froch's fight, he appeared to be besting him there as well.
It's all in black and white (depending on your monitor settings) what I had to say, the Hopkins reference was an example, but you already knew that I hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticWhat has Bernard got to do with this ? We are talking about Dirrell - Froch.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelI know you can't but like the others you don't address the falling to the knees shit, same as the Hopkins fans don't seem to remember Bernard clutching his balls like a fucking loser trying to steal the fight againsed Joe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugilistic
One guy wants to fight, the other tries to steal it by doing stupid shit like faking fouls and going to his knees. As a judge what the fucking hell would you do seriously?
"He is trying to get a point taken off Joe to win the fight, what genius"
"I like the guy who keeps falling to his knees to avoid shots, smart stuff"
Dirrell wasn't faking anything, Froch fought a very dirty fight.
What Dirrell did like clinching etc shouldn't affect the scoring unless the ref takes action like deducting a point. Dirrell was still landing more and throwing more.
Based on the 4 scoring criterias in a fight:
Clean Effective Punching
Effective Aggression
Ring Generalship
Defense
Dirrell clearly won.
The difference between the Hopkins - Calzaghe fight and the Froch - Dirrell fight is Calzaghe's aggression was actually effective as he threw more than Hopkins and was able to land some shots especially as the fight went on.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelIt's all in black and white (depending on your monitor settings) what I had to say, the Hopkins reference was an example, but you already knew that I hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticWhat has Bernard got to do with this ? We are talking about Dirrell - Froch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell wasn't faking anything, Froch fought a very dirty fight.
What Dirrell did like clinching etc shouldn't affect the scoring unless the ref takes action like deducting a point. Dirrell was still landing more and throwing more.
Based on the 4 scoring criterias in a fight:
Clean Effective Punching
Effective Aggression
Ring Generalship
Defense
Dirrell clearly won.
Froch on the other hand came forward but threw less than Dirrell the whole fight and landed literally nothing.
Look at the bold bit, just for a second. It's pathetic, it's a boxing match. You are there to fight, not do everything you said that I put in bold.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Exactly, I thought Hopkins just edged Calzaghe, but supporting Joe, I had no real problem it going the other way. However, that was a fight with a lot of close rounds where it came down to activity or cleaner effective punching. The difference was both were landing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugilistic
I'm pretty sure Froch threw less & definitely landed less. This fight should be compared to fights like Berto-Urango & Khan-Kotelnik. It was in no way comparable to JMM-Pac II or B-Hop-Joe
Your right in everything you say. But Dirrell is not from the UK. So therefor he can not win. The fix was in from the beginning. It's how they roll in the UK and Europe. The home fighter wins no matter what.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT RockWell direct me to the eye storeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell landed more punches
Dirrell's punches were cleaner, sharper, crisp and accurate
Dirrell was the better defender
Dirrell had froch on rubber legs 2x compared 0 times
Dirrell held and leaned a bit excessive.. Froch showed what a low class bush league cock he is with his fouling.. Desperate move by an absolute scrub of a fighter
Froch did fuck all but plod around as usual, swing for the fences fanning off the front row cause he couldnt hit water if he fell out of a boat..
Dirrell got fucked sideways and the idiots it the crowd were cheering when froch was swinging at the invisible man in the ring, cause Andre was nowere near when Carl the snail Froch loaded up.. He looked like an absolute bewildered clown, Mr confidence didnt look to sure of himself as he kneeled down with Dirrell in prayer, reminded me of how suprised Pac's face looked when the judges screwed JMM in their 2nd fight
Ok I hear you, Froch came forward all night and Dirrell landed some shots, fell to his knees, ran a lot.......Floyd the 2nd right here lolQuote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticThe difference between the Hopkins - Calzaghe fight and the Froch - Dirrell fight is Calzaghe's aggression was actually effective as he threw more than Hopkins and was able to land some shots especially as the fight went on.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelIt's all in black and white (depending on your monitor settings) what I had to say, the Hopkins reference was an example, but you already knew that I hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugilistic
Froch on the other hand came forward but threw less than Dirrell the whole fight and landed literally nothing.
Maybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseYour right in everything you say. But Dirrell is not from the UK. So therefor he can not win. The fix was in from the beginning. It's how they roll in the UK and Europe. The home fighter wins no matter what.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT RockWell direct me to the eye storeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kel
Dirrell landed more punches
Dirrell's punches were cleaner, sharper, crisp and accurate
Dirrell was the better defender
Dirrell had froch on rubber legs 2x compared 0 times
Dirrell held and leaned a bit excessive.. Froch showed what a low class bush league cock he is with his fouling.. Desperate move by an absolute scrub of a fighter
Froch did fuck all but plod around as usual, swing for the fences fanning off the front row cause he couldnt hit water if he fell out of a boat..
Dirrell got fucked sideways and the idiots it the crowd were cheering when froch was swinging at the invisible man in the ring, cause Andre was nowere near when Carl the snail Froch loaded up.. He looked like an absolute bewildered clown, Mr confidence didnt look to sure of himself as he kneeled down with Dirrell in prayer, reminded me of how suprised Pac's face looked when the judges screwed JMM in their 2nd fight
Funny thread that's for sure.
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelMaybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseYour right in everything you say. But Dirrell is not from the UK. So therefor he can not win. The fix was in from the beginning. It's how they roll in the UK and Europe. The home fighter wins no matter what.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Funny thread that's for sure.
Who is your fav white fighter?Quote:
Originally Posted by Majesty