Official Super Six Follow Live Thread

[Gandalf]

I hate to say it but Froch makes a good point.

I agree, and I also agree with Killersheeps comments earlier in this thread.

Dirrell was ugly, ugly ugly. He was diving around on the canvas repeatedly for nothing and he was holding like he wanted to bear Froch's children. He did get warned repeatedly and eventually a point was taken. Froch did hit on the back of the head, but I agree with him doing that. Fighters who hold excessively or lean down too much need to be hit somehow and that's what Froch did. I have no qualms with any fighter trying to make the fight and that's what Froch was trying to do. Maybe a point could have come off of him, but the excessive holding and bending below the waist was what was forcing Froch to bend the rules. Dirrell started the cheating each time and deserved the penalty first in my eyes.

It was scrappy fight, with a number of very close rounds. In those instances I favour the fighter who is trying to make the fight rather than the one who pot shots a couple of times and holds and dives to the canvas. At least Malignaggi was throwing a lot of leather and landing more than here and there in his fight with Diaz. Here Dirrell was landing at very irregular intervals with a lot of ugly nonsense inbetween. I frown upon the blatant cheating. Excessive holding is the worst thing in boxing for me.

Froch fought poorly too IMO. He couldn't cut off the ring and he should have had Dirrell on the ropes more and tried to be more concise with his punching. There was too much following around with hands held low.

I would be content with a draw and felt the scorecards were a little wide. But overall I preferred Froch's aggression so give him the nod. It might not be the popular view around here, but I don't care about being popular. I say what I think.

[Kirkland Laing]

Abraham is fighting Dirrell in America. I think Abraham will watch that and be thinking he has to knock Dirrell out or he'll lose on the cards.

[Kev]

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

How did you see it Killersheep?

On reflection I don't think either deserved to win, Froch looked sloppy, missed wildly and used rough house tactics, but constantly pressed the fight and was the aggressor throughout.

Dirrell made Froch looked slow and ungainly and dodged a lot of the punches thrown, but did very little offensively, backpeddled virtually the entire fight and held an awful lot.

On the plus sides.

Froch once again showed a real will to win and a hunger. He kept coming forward, wanting to make a fight of it.

Dirrell showed excellent movement, sharp quick counterpunching and a great defence.


Ultimately its always been said you need to wrest the belt off the champion and in no way did Dirrell do that, he did a great job of surviving and looked extremely comfortable in fact, but he didn't comeback with much except in a couple of rounds where he clearly looked the sharper.

I think Dirrell could have won if he would have engaged more, although then I guess he would fighting Carl's fight giving him better chances too.

I'm just pumped for Froch Arthur, I believe that is next?

That will be a war. I think Abraham does most things better than Carl, but Abraham isn't as fast or elusive as Jermain and Andre so Froch will be able to get his punches off too. Great matchup.

[Deanrw]

I had it 8 rounds to 4 for Dirrell without regarding the point deduction. So I ended up having it 7-4-1 for Dirrell with the point taken into the scoring.

I also thought I was being generous to Froch.

[killersheep]

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

How did you see it Killersheep?

On reflection I don't think either deserved to win, Froch looked sloppy, missed wildly and used rough house tactics, but constantly pressed the fight and was the aggressor throughout.

Dirrell made Froch looked slow and ungainly and dodged a lot of the punches thrown, but did very little offensively, backpeddled virtually the entire fight and held an awful lot.

On the plus sides.

Froch once again showed a real will to win and a hunger. He kept coming forward, wanting to make a fight of it.

Dirrell showed excellent movement, sharp quick counterpunching and a great defence.


Ultimately its always been said you need to wrest the belt off the champion and in no way did Dirrell do that, he did a great job of surviving and looked extremely comfortable in fact, but he didn't comeback with much except in a couple of rounds where he clearly looked the sharper.

I think Dirrell could have won if he would have engaged more, although then I guess he would fighting Carl's fight giving him better chances too.

I'm just pumped for Froch Arthur, I believe that is next?

That will be a war. I think Abraham does most things better than Carl, but Abraham isn't as fast or elusive as Jermain and Andre so Froch will be able to get his punches off too. Great matchup.

I had it 6-5 Dirrell, I lost my stream in the 3rd so I couldn't assess that round, damn computer lost connection. I absolutely think that Dirrell had tons of opportunities to land those amazing combos and didn't take them enough. Froch never looked in control except for a few moments in that fight. I agree that neither fighter did look that convincing, I don't think this was a robbery.

[Spicoli]

Abraham makes Froch look a complete novice..well.He refused himself his best chance vs Dirrell.Sat there second guessing.Think Kess or Arthur do a number on him.

[Kev]

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

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.

You know it's ironic, when I discussed Obama policy with Jazmerkin it turned out he was a journalist, when I discussed geology with Salty it turned out he was a geologist and now I am discussing computer sensors with a man who makes them for a living.

Oh and when I went on about chess it turned out ICB was a chess prodigy at school who could beat grandmasters.

It seems I always come up against an expert in whatever field I talk about.

Talented folks here on Saddos.

[RozzySean]

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

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.

117-110 sound right. I can give Froch 4. Considering that Froch was fight the likes of Dan Westerman and Brian Magee at this stage of his career, Dirrell did pretty well to leave Froch's hometown with a split loss.

[killersheep]

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

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.

You know it's ironic, when I discussed Obama policy with Jazmerkin it turned out he was a journalist, when I discussed geology with Salty it turned out he was a geologist and now I am discussing computer sensors with a man who makes them for a living.

Oh and when I went on about chess it turned out ICB was a chess prodigy at school who could beat grandmasters.

It seems I always come up against an expert in whatever field I talk about.

Talented folks here on Saddos.

I certainly wouldn't say I'm the expert, but in fairness my knowledge in what your talking about is equal to your knowledge in chess. I like how you add the air of suspicion around the three of us by adding ICB in the mix as well. I know it's hard to understand, but some of us have to work.

[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

oh shit...


thats fantastic

[Kirkland Laing]

GROUP STAGE 2
ANDRE DIRREL vs. ARTHUR ABRAHAM
MIKKEL KESSLER vs. CARL FROCH
JERMAIN TAYLOR vs. ANDRE WARD
GROUP STAGE 3
ANDRE DIRRELL vs. ANDRE WARD
CARL FROCH vs. ARTHUR ABRAHAM
MIKKEL KESSLER vs. JERMAIN TAYLOR


If Taylor does fight again it means Ward still gets three fights at home.

[Diane]

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

How did you see it Killersheep?

On reflection I don't think either deserved to win, Froch looked sloppy, missed wildly and used rough house tactics, but constantly pressed the fight and was the aggressor throughout.

Dirrell made Froch looked slow and ungainly and dodged a lot of the punches thrown, but did very little offensively, backpeddled virtually the entire fight and held an awful lot.

On the plus sides.

Froch once again showed a real will to win and a hunger. He kept coming forward, wanting to make a fight of it.

Dirrell showed excellent movement, sharp quick counterpunching and a great defence.


Ultimately its always been said you need to wrest the belt off the champion and in no way did Dirrell do that, he did a great job of surviving and looked extremely comfortable in fact, but he didn't comeback with much except in a couple of rounds where he clearly looked the sharper.

I think Dirrell could have won if he would have engaged more, although then I guess he would fighting Carl's fight giving him better chances too.

I'm just pumped for Froch Arthur, I believe that is next?

That will be a war. I think Abraham does most things better than Carl, but Abraham isn't as fast or elusive as Jermain and Andre so Froch will be able to get his punches off too. Great matchup.

Nope, Froch has to fight Kessler next.

[Kev]

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.

You know it's ironic, when I discussed Obama policy with Jazmerkin it turned out he was a journalist, when I discussed geology with Salty it turned out he was a geologist and now I am discussing computer sensors with a man who makes them for a living.

Oh and when I went on about chess it turned out ICB was a chess prodigy at school who could beat grandmasters.

It seems I always come up against an expert in whatever field I talk about.

Talented folks here on Saddos.

I certainly wouldn't say I'm the expert, but in fairness my knowledge in what your talking about is equal to your knowledge in chess.

I think it's an interesting discussion topic at least.

There is a system being worked on now for use in amateur boxing which is interesting I feel. It would involve sensors in the vest and gloves so that every punches is accurately measured whether it landed or not and would be wirelessly linked to a big screen display so that the crowd could see exactly what punches were landing and where on the body.

Sensors in gloves may deliver KO blow to corrupt judges - Sport - smh.com.au

They say they still have some teething problems with blocking but it shows the possibilities.

Of course this method would mean wearing vests which I wouldn't want to see in pro boxing at all, but I don't know if later technology can get around that........

[CFH]

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

How did you see it Killersheep?

On reflection I don't think either deserved to win, Froch looked sloppy, missed wildly and used rough house tactics, but constantly pressed the fight and was the aggressor throughout.

Dirrell made Froch looked slow and ungainly and dodged a lot of the punches thrown, but did very little offensively, backpeddled virtually the entire fight and held an awful lot.

On the plus sides.

Froch once again showed a real will to win and a hunger. He kept coming forward, wanting to make a fight of it.

Dirrell showed excellent movement, sharp quick counterpunching and a great defence.


Ultimately its always been said you need to wrest the belt off the champion and in no way did Dirrell do that, he did a great job of surviving and looked extremely comfortable in fact, but he didn't comeback with much except in a couple of rounds where he clearly looked the sharper.

I think Dirrell could have won if he would have engaged more, although then I guess he would fighting Carl's fight giving him better chances too.

I'm just pumped for Froch Arthur, I believe that is next?

That will be a war. I think Abraham does most things better than Carl, but Abraham isn't as fast or elusive as Jermain and Andre so Froch will be able to get his punches off too. Great matchup.

Nope, Froch has to fight Kessler next.

Regardless of who wins b/t Kessler and Ward?

[killersheep]

You know it's ironic, when I discussed Obama policy with Jazmerkin it turned out he was a journalist, when I discussed geology with Salty it turned out he was a geologist and now I am discussing computer sensors with a man who makes them for a living.

Oh and when I went on about chess it turned out ICB was a chess prodigy at school who could beat grandmasters.

It seems I always come up against an expert in whatever field I talk about.

Talented folks here on Saddos.

I certainly wouldn't say I'm the expert, but in fairness my knowledge in what your talking about is equal to your knowledge in chess.

I think it's an interesting discussion topic at least.

There is a system being worked on now for use in amateur boxing which is interesting I feel. It would involve sensors in the vest and gloves so that every punches is accurately measured whether it landed or not and would be wirelessly linked to a big screen display so that the crowd could see exactly what punches were landing and where on the body.

Sensors in gloves may deliver KO blow to corrupt judges - Sport - smh.com.au

They say they still have some teething problems with blocking but it shows the possibilities.

Of course this method would mean wearing vests which I wouldn't want to see in pro boxing at all, but I don't know if later technology can get around that........

It makes sense for amatuer boxing where it is scored strictly by punches landed.