Just watched froch v kessler again and i had it 117-113 to froch
biast i hear you shouting, i dont think so
i challenge to to watch it again, turn the sound down, try and forget how you feel about the fighters and score it as honest as posible
Printable View
Just watched froch v kessler again and i had it 117-113 to froch
biast i hear you shouting, i dont think so
i challenge to to watch it again, turn the sound down, try and forget how you feel about the fighters and score it as honest as posible
Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
mate asking these lot to score a carl froch fight without any biased is like asking gary glitter to babysit for you
PS:117-113?? you should never score a round 10-10 mate, makes the whole process inadequate
i think i scored 2 rounds 10-10 and that was coz a couple were close and i hadnt given kessler anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by HattonTheHammerQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
mate asking these lot to score a carl froch fight without any biased is like asking gary glitter to babysit for you
PS:117-113?? you should never score a round 10-10 mate, makes the whole process inadequate
if im not allowed to score them 10 10 then i my card would be 117-111
p.s how did you score round 11 to kes? that and 5 kes looked in trouble
10-10 is for idiots like jim watt who has absolutely not a single grain of fathom of how to score a boxing contestQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44i think i scored 2 rounds 10-10 and that was coz a couple were close and i hadnt given kessler anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by HattonTheHammerQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
mate asking these lot to score a carl froch fight without any biased is like asking gary glitter to babysit for you
PS:117-113?? you should never score a round 10-10 mate, makes the whole process inadequate
if im not allowed to score them 10 10 then i my card would be 117-111
p.s how did you score round 11 to kes? that and 5 kes looked in trouble
i gave 11 to kess mate because i thought super carl was blowing a bit and getting tired. But so would you if youve just pummelled the home town hero for the last 10rounds
watch 11 again and tell me what you think
Wow :rolleyes:
But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.
:-X
what isnt?
He didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by milesHe didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
From someone who has seen it a dozen or so times and scored it on every single occasion let me assure you, FROCH WON
Oh yea he did trust me look in the other thread, he had it 115-113 for John Ruiz. He also had Joe Frazier ahead going into the last round vs Muhammad Ali, in there 3rd fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by milesHe didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
I mean honestly WTF, these can't be serious scores can they ? and in what part of the fight did Carl Froch whoop Mikkel Kessler ?
It actually pisses me off, when a person keeps claiming lies. I mean no one else i've seen on any boxing forum, had Carl Froch winning.
I mean i can understand Ono thinking Carl Froch maybe edged it. Although i personally don't understand how he did, but still thats reasonable enough.
But a 4 point or wider win for Carl Froch, is just fucking a joke. Considering 90 percent of boxing fans feel Mikkel Kessler won by atleast 2 rounds or more, but then again were all wrong and HTH is right because he's Saddo legend.
Give me a fucking break.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBOh yea he did trust me look in the other thread, he had it 115-113 for John Ruiz. He also had Joe Frazier ahead going into the last round vs Muhammad Ali, in there 3rd fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by milesHe didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
I mean honestly WTF, these can't be serious scores can they ? and in what part of the fight did Carl Froch whoop Mikkel Kessler ?
It actually pisses me off, when a person keeps claiming lies. I mean no one else i've seen on any boxing forum, had Carl Froch winning.
I mean i can understand Ono thinking Carl Froch maybe edged it. Although i personally don't understand how he did, but still thats reasonable enough.
But a 4 point or wider win for Carl Froch, is just fucking a joke. Considering 90 percent of boxing fans feel Mikkel Kessler won by atleast 2 rounds or more, but then again were all wrong and HTH is right because he's Saddo legend.
Give me a fucking break.
ruiz-jones - every single fricking time jones landed the crowd would go wild everytime ruiz hit jones not a thing was said. The whole spectacle was created for a middleweight to become heavyweight champ of the world but in reality jones flurries were few and far between and the majority of the fight was dominated by ruiz 115-113 ruiz
Ali-frazier 3 - you honestly telling me that wasnt a close fight?
froch-kessler - many well respected journalists claim froch got a rough deal, does that make them "liars"?? as ive rightfully pointed too plenty of times over when youve seen a fight over and over again you have the right to state who won it. Froch won end of story
Quote:
Originally Posted by milesHe didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
watch it again dude
kessler doesnt land a meaningful punch till the 6th
a couple of close early rounds which froch lands more punches, then by the 5th it looks like froch is gonna walk it, then kessler has a couple of good rounds, probly his best of the fight and in the 8th froch starts to get back on top, in the 11th kessler looks completely gone
someone laughed in the other thread because hth scored the 8th to kessler, i dont see whats funny, kes landed 1 punch in the round, all be it his best of the fight, but you dont win a round off one punch
Whats the point of watching it again ? it wasn't that controversial that it needs repeated viewing's. A majority of the boxing fans had Mikkel Kessler winning by atleast 2 or 3 rounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by milesHe didn't did he? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.
watch it again dude
kessler doesnt land a meaningful punch till the 6th
a couple of close early rounds which froch lands more punches, then by the 5th it looks like froch is gonna walk it, then kessler has a couple of good rounds, probly his best of the fight and in the 8th froch starts to get back on top, in the 11th kessler looks completely gone
someone laughed in the other thread because hth scored the 8th to kessler, i dont see whats funny, kes landed 1 punch in the round, all be it his best of the fight, but you dont win a round off one punch
And Carl Froch never whooped anyone, and he never looked like walking it. I think you need to take those glasses off, you and your mate HTH. Because your both making yourself look silly.
I mean do you think a majority of boxing fans having Mikkel Kessler, as the winner is all because we have some sort of vendetta against Carl Froch ? what about the other British fans having Mikkel Kessler winning ? most of the British fans had Mikkel Kessler as the winner.
He was the aggressor, he had the better workrate. He landed a good steady amount of punches to the body and head. And if it was on the line going into the 12th round, Mikkel Kessler pulled it out and was a clear winning by a few rounds.
Now im just watching round 8 now, and i'll talk you through what im seeing. I see Carl Froch pocking out slow jabs not landing, Mikkel Kessler coming forward and throwing not landing many, but he is the aggressor and all Carl Froch is doing is backing up throwing slow jabs which are not landing. Mikkel Kessler lands a big right hand 56 seconds to go in the round, that staggers Carl Froch. Mikkel Kessler goes to the body and head. He's got Carl Froch up against the ropes, two jabs and a right hand from Mikkel Kessler.
Again a clear round for Mikkel Kessler, Carl Froch done nothing in that round. Mikkel Kessler was the one coming forward, he threw more punches. Landed the best punch of the round, and he had Carl Froch up against the ropes at the end of the round. So just explain how you had Carl Froch winning that round ?
I have just watched it and i dont believe anyone who knows anything about boxing could have kessler as much as drawing the fightQuote:
Originally Posted by ICB
i watched it at the time drunk, listening to the commentry and i thought it was close and could have gone either way, it wasnt, froch won and it wasnt close
after watching it i would say kesslers best days are behind him, he wasnt competative for much of the fight
also dude froch wasnt staggered, that one punch kes landed in round 8 was his best of the fight and froch was slightly off ballance
you are either watching the fight through froch hating glasses or you cant admit you are wrong
Carl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.
Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.
Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBCarl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.
Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.
Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.
i have argued back, kessler landed 1 punch in that round froch landed many, admittedly it was one of kesslers better rounds but he didnt win it
like i said before, you dont win a round on 1 punch
and kessler had froch on the ropes in the fight on a few occasions including the 8th, i can tell you now on all thjose occasions combined kessler didnt land a punch of any meaning
i dont think the majority of boxing fans would have froch winning the fight if they watched it without the commentary and were completely non biast
i can almost understand people making a case for saying froch lost to dirrell because dirrel landed maybe even as many punches, even tho they were all on the run, in the kessler fight froch out landed him several to little
froch won of that there is no doubt
Again what punches did Carl Froch land ? examples ? Carl Froch was backing up throwing slow jabs. Mikkel Kessler was the aggressor, landed the best punch in an uneventful round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBCarl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.
Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.
Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.
i have argued back, kessler landed 1 punch in that round froch landed many, admittedly it was one of kesslers better rounds but he didnt win it
like i said before, you dont win a round on 1 punch
and kessler had froch on the ropes in the fight on a few occasions including the 8th, i can tell you now on all thjose occasions combined kessler didnt land a punch of any meaning
i dont think the majority of boxing fans would have froch winning the fight if they watched it without the commentary and were completely non biast
i can almost understand people making a case for saying froch lost to dirrell because dirrel landed maybe even as many punches, even tho they were all on the run, in the kessler fight froch out landed him several to little
froch won of that there is no doubt
Its like im talking to a brick wall here, you can't be serious. I mean honestly tell me this is wind up, and your just trying to get a rise out of people ? how many people watch fights without sound ?
The way your making it sound, its like this is the worst robbery of the last decade. It would make no difference if you watched it on the moon, under water, on the tv, on the computer, with sound, without sound.
Carl Froch lost get over it, the reason a majority of boxing fans. And some of them know alot more about the sport than you do. And have watched 100's more fights, had Mikkel Kessler winning is because he did win legitmately.
As i've told you and your mate HTH, 100's of times. Yet you both bring up the same pitiful argument. Mikkel Kessler was coming forward, he landed the better punches, he had the better workrate, he closed out the fight in style in the last round.
How hard is that too understand ? i don't care how many times you watch it, while you and your mate HTH are fantasizing over Carl Froch. And giving random rounds to Carl Froch he clearly lost.
It won't make no difference, Carl Froch lost legitmately end of.
Kessler won a close but clear decision for me, but the sad thing is he was there for the taking and Froch for me was a little under par in that fight.
which rounds did he win?Quote:
Originally Posted by skel1983
watch the 5th and the 11th, is easy for froch in the 5th and the 11th kessler is almost outQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBAgain what punches did Carl Froch land ? examples ? Carl Froch was backing up throwing slow jabs. Mikkel Kessler was the aggressor, landed the best punch in an uneventful round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBCarl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.
Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.
Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.
i have argued back, kessler landed 1 punch in that round froch landed many, admittedly it was one of kesslers better rounds but he didnt win it
like i said before, you dont win a round on 1 punch
and kessler had froch on the ropes in the fight on a few occasions including the 8th, i can tell you now on all thjose occasions combined kessler didnt land a punch of any meaning
i dont think the majority of boxing fans would have froch winning the fight if they watched it without the commentary and were completely non biast
i can almost understand people making a case for saying froch lost to dirrell because dirrel landed maybe even as many punches, even tho they were all on the run, in the kessler fight froch out landed him several to little
froch won of that there is no doubt
Its like im talking to a brick wall here, you can't be serious. I mean honestly tell me this is wind up, and your just trying to get a rise out of people ? how many people watch fights without sound ?
The way your making it sound, its like this is the worst robbery of the last decade. It would make no difference if you watched it on the moon, under water, on the tv, on the computer, with sound, without sound.
Carl Froch lost get over it, the reason a majority of boxing fans. And some of them know alot more about the sport than you do. And have watched 100's more fights, had Mikkel Kessler winning is because he did win legitmately.
As i've told you and your mate HTH, 100's of times. Yet you both bring up the same pitiful argument. Mikkel Kessler was coming forward, he landed the better punches, he had the better workrate, he closed out the fight in style in the last round.
How hard is that too understand ? i don't care how many times you watch it, while you and your mate HTH are fantasizing over Carl Froch. And giving random rounds to Carl Froch he clearly lost.
It won't make no difference, Carl Froch lost legitmately end of.
the only thing you can give kessler is perhaps he came forward a little more
kessler wasnt competative for most of the fight
end of what?
erics44 has only been here a short time and he is already proving he knows more about boxing than most of the veterans on here claim too
ice - you saw a different fight to everyone else, im convinced your talking about the undercard fight as nothing you currently say makes any sense
Eric I will have to watch the fight again I will get back to you
turn off the damn showtime commentary this time around eh mate ;D;D;DQuote:
Originally Posted by skel1983
good stuffQuote:
Originally Posted by skel1983
like HTH says tho its better with no commentry
If someone saw the fight the same as you except they found Kessler the winner of your two 10-10 rounds what would their score be?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i think i scored 2 rounds 10-10 and that was coz a couple were close and i hadnt given kessler anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by HattonTheHammerQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
mate asking these lot to score a carl froch fight without any biased is like asking gary glitter to babysit for you
PS:117-113?? you should never score a round 10-10 mate, makes the whole process inadequate
if im not allowed to score them 10 10 then i my card would be 117-111
p.s how did you score round 11 to kes? that and 5 kes looked in trouble
Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterIf someone saw the fight the same as you except they found Kessler the winner of your two 10-10 rounds what would their score be?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i think i scored 2 rounds 10-10 and that was coz a couple were close and i hadnt given kessler anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by HattonTheHammerQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
mate asking these lot to score a carl froch fight without any biased is like asking gary glitter to babysit for you
PS:117-113?? you should never score a round 10-10 mate, makes the whole process inadequate
if im not allowed to score them 10 10 then i my card would be 117-111
p.s how did you score round 11 to kes? that and 5 kes looked in trouble
115-113 - still for froch
I think I had it 115-113 Froch. It' s been a long time since I saw the fight though.
Maybe we can do this one in the 'Controversial Fights' thread next week if there's enough demand.
I really don't get where the fuss for this fight is coming from, to have froch winning 117-111, is as bad as one judge having the martinez williams fight 119-111 for williams. It was a fairly close fight in which the right man won, sorry froch just didn't seem to want it as badly tho I don't think. Backing up for most of the fight isn't going to win you the fight if you're not outlanding the dude and making him miss, which froch didn't do. Erics 44 you say kess' best day are behind him and you're right, his 1-2 doesn't look nowhere near as crisp as it used to be, but then if his days are behind him what's that say about froch?
Likekessler. Better. Hate. Froch
froch was on the money that nightQuote:
Originally Posted by armin
still looks crisp
which rounds did kes win?
-Sportinglife.com . Even round for me and I've got Kessler winning by a round - 116-115. But how will the judges score it?
-ProBoxing-Fans.com unofficial scorecard is 115-113 for Mikkel Kessler
-boxingbulletin.com 115-114 for Mikkel Kessler
- telegraph.co.uk Gareth A Davies’ scorecard: Kessler 115 Froch 114
- bbc 115-114 kessler
That's not me looking for those scores but just clicking on the first few links that pop up for kessler froch scorecards/ rbr. I am not saying that it's inconceivable to have froch winning it was a close fight but kessler was the winner for me. I'm sure there are plenty of reasonable people that thought froch won, but still a clear minority I believe. To have froch winning 117-111 on the other hand tho reeks of bias to me. The last 2 sources are british and they had froch losing in a close fight. I haven't seen the fight in a while but what round's did I have kess winning, well sure as shit more than 3! If I get to watching it again I will post scores.
Everyone else ? who's everyone else ? most ringside experts, and most boxing fans had Mikkel Kessler winning, and the 3 most important men, the official judges also had Mikkel Kessler winning, so no i'd say i see the right one.Quote:
Originally Posted by HattonTheHammer
Surely this thread is a bit of a wind up. Anyway, for sure I will try and download the fight over the weekend and give my own proper take on it in the next few days.
The full fight is on Youtube, in HD quality mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
Cheers! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBThe full fight is on Youtube, in HD quality mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
I thought Kessler won comfortably and couldnt understand why some thought Froch won afterwards. He was never going to get a decision in Denmark unless he clearly won the rounds. Most of the time he was on the back foot and Kessler was the one opening up. It was almsot as if Froch was afraid of giving it his all and surredered the title rather than go out fighting. He certainly didnt show teh passion he showed against Taylor and Pascal. We may see the warrior back against Abraham but he would be better suited using his head in that one ironically.
1 Froch
2 Kessler
3 Froch
4 Kessler
5 Froch
6 Kessler
7 Kessler
8 Kessler
9 Kessler
10 Froch
11 Froch
12 Kessler
That is my scorecard, hard fight to judge in truth, very close rounds Kessler always pressing the action Froch countering well Kessler working the body well, Froch lost this fight in the middle rounds, like people say if this was in the uk he probably would of got the nod the rounds were close many of them anyway, just pisses me off because watching that Froch didnt look his best that night and kessler has dropped dramatically from his prime, he was there for the taking and Froch did not deliver imo.
I thought it was very close and although I wish Froch won, I just felt that I couldn't argue as all the better work was being done by Kessler.
It was a great tear up, but the better boxing seemed to be coming from Kessler.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0james0
i have watched it again (for the third time) and i am in disbelief that anyone could say kessler won
the way i see it 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 12 were close enough to argue either way, froch was clearly on top in the other 6, so being absolutely kind in every way to kes it was a draw
skel - he didnt win 4, i have watched that round more than 3 times and no matter how many ways i look at it kes didnt do anywhere near enough, he looked out of his depth