Dirrell deserved to lose. Fact.

[CFH]

Fenster: your love of inflammatory statements never ceases to amuse and entertain me

Amuse and entertain? Great stuff

Don't know where you got me being a Froch fan from?

Killersheep, exactly!

I never said you were a Froch fan, if that was directed at me, I was replying to the person who seemed to be implying that the fact that you did not seen to be a Froch fan somehow clouded your judgement, which I feel is incorrect.

[Fenster]

Fenster: your love of inflammatory statements never ceases to amuse and entertain me

Amuse and entertain? Great stuff

Don't know where you got me being a Froch fan from?

Killersheep, exactly!

I never said you were a Froch fan, if that was directed at me, I was replying to the person who seemed to be implying that the fact that you did not seen to be a Froch fan somehow clouded your judgement, which I feel is incorrect.

Ah right

I didn't really get what he was waffling about to be honest.

Just happy he enjoyed himself.

[Gandalf]

It was a boring, crappy close fight with many of the rounds having no action whatsoever. Froch was at least making the fight. I said yesterday I thought Froch getting the nod was fair enough and I stand by that. A draw would be fine too. I'm less inclined to award theatrics of the kind Dirrell was exhibiting.

The guy should be a ballerina, not a boxer. I hope he gets duffed up over the course of the tournament and decides track and field is more his thing.

[CFH]

It was a boring, crappy close fight with many of the rounds having no action whatsoever. Froch was at least making the fight. I said yesterday I thought Froch getting the nod was fair enough and I stand by that. A draw would be fine too. I'm less inclined to award theatrics of the kind Dirrell was exhibiting.

The guy should be a ballerina, not a boxer. I hope he gets duffed up over the course of the tournament and decides track and field is more his thing.

This isn't directed at you specifically Niles, but none of those things should have any real bearing on the scoring of a fight beyond where they fit into the four criteria, especially in this instance where Froch did nothing that was effective. It is the referees job to worry about that stuff, he can penalize or disqualify a fighter if he feels it is warranted.

Judging is based on 4 criteria:

Clean punching
Effective Aggression
Defense
Ring Generalship

In those areas Dirrell clearly won the fight IMO.

[awdleyfuturehalloffamer]

Ring generalship i would give to froch for the first 10 rounds and to dirrell for the last 2 rounds.

Exposing back of your head: Dirrell
Holding ------------------->: Dirrell
Exposing your back--------> Dirrell
Running mostly every round : Dirrell
Refusing to fight mostly every round: Dirrell
Going to one knee to coax a foul: Dirrell


Dirrell is the clear winner alright.

[JazMerkin]

Ring generalship i would give to froch for the first 10 rounds and to dirrell for the last 2 rounds.

Exposing back of your head: Dirrell
Holding ------------------->: Dirrell
Exposing your back--------> Dirrell
Running mostly every round : Dirrell
Refusing to fight mostly every round: Dirrell
Going to one knee to coax a foul: Dirrell


Dirrell is the clear winner alright.

Froch had great ring generalship if it was the WWE

[OumaFan]

.[/quote]

This isn't directed at you specifically Niles, but none of those things should have any real bearing on the scoring of a fight, especially in this instance. It is the referees job to worry about that stuff, he can penalize or disqualify a fighter if he feels it is warranted.

Judging is based on 4 criteria:

Clean punching
Effective Aggression
Defense
Ring Generalship

In those areas Dirrell clearly won the fight IMO.[/quote]

FYI CFH, while you were on that four day vacation they added "meh, I don't like that guy" as the fifth criteria.

[Gandalf]

It's miles, not Niles...

I know how fights are scored and each of those criteria comes with what the judge prefers.

Clean Punching- The rounds Dirrell won were ones where his accurate punching was apparent, but for many of those rounds he simply wasn't throwing anything whereas Froch was throwing more and though not scoring high percentage shots was landing in spurts. Taken on a round by round basis I didn't see much to choose between them, they were both inneffective, though I liked Dirrells work in the 11th.

Effective aggression- Dirrell was effective in this area in the 11th and half of the 12th. The rest of the time was clinching, cycling and jumping in a heap onto the canvas. Froch did a poor job of cutting the ring off, but was at least making an effort. I give this to Froch overall.

Defence- Of course Dirrell had the better defence. However, having said that a lot of it was simply about hugging and diving head first at Froch's feet. There were times when he was able to duck and dive away from punches but glancing blows were still getting through. Frochs lack of defence was made up by his greater aggression. Dirrell's defence, though unique was counted out by his inability to throw punches.

Ring generalship- Again, for me this is a case of two fighters doing very little that was particularly effective. Dirrell was dancing around like a clown and Froch was blindly stalking. Neither fighter was doing enough to say "I am directing the fight". Dirrell was out of his comfort zone in many rounds, getting caught on the ropes and resorting to fouling (ie forcing the clinch and of course diving at Froch's feet). Likewise Froch did the same himself. Only in the 11th would I say, Dirrell finally asserted himself. But that was fleeting.

It was a shitty fight, and both fighters stunk out the joint. If both could have been DQ'ed I would be quite content. Malignaggi threw nearly a thousand punches against Diaz and made an effort to make a fight, that is what I like to see in a fighter with handspeed. Also one of the reasons I loved Calzaghe so much was his output, effort and dedication. I just cannot give fighters who pose, run, hug and don't actually throw ANY punches much credit. Dirrell was a bitch before the fight and then went ahead and fought like one. Pathetic. He didn't do enough to take Froch's title.

He probably could have had he applied himself, but he didn't and so he lost. I have no qualms with that. If he had fought more like he did in the 11th there wouldn't even be any need for any debate.

[JazMerkin]

It's miles, not Niles...

I know how fights are scored and each of those criteria comes with what the judge prefers.

Clean Punching- The rounds Dirrell won were ones where his accurate punching was apparent, but for many of those rounds he simply wasn't throwing anything whereas Froch was throwing more and though not scoring high percentage shots was landing in spurts. Taken on a round by round basis I didn't see much to choose between them, they were both inneffective, though I liked Dirrells work in the 11th.

Effective aggression- Dirrell was effective in this area in the 11th and half of the 12th. The rest of the time was clinching, cycling and jumping in a heap onto the canvas. Froch did a poor job of cutting the ring off, but was at least making an effort. I give this to Froch overall.

Defence- Of course Dirrell had the better defence. However, having said that a lot of it was simply about hugging and diving head first at Froch's feet. There were times when he was able to duck and dive away from punches but glancing blows were still getting through. Frochs lack of defence was made up by his greater aggression. Dirrell's defence, though unique was counted out by his inability to throw punches.

Ring generalship- Again, for me this is a case of two fighters doing very little that was particularly effective. Dirrell was dancing around like a clown and Froch was blindly stalking. Neither fighter was doing enough to say "I am directing the fight". Dirrell was out of his comfort zone in many rounds, getting caught on the ropes and resorting to fouling (ie forcing the clinch and of course diving at Froch's feet). Likewise Froch did the same himself. Only in the 11th would I say, Dirrell finally asserted himself. But that was fleeting.

It was a shitty fight, and both fighters stunk out the joint. If both could have been DQ'ed I would be quite content. Malignaggi threw nearly a thousand punches against Diaz and made an effort to make a fight, that is what I like to see in a fighter with handspeed. Also one of the reasons I loved Calzaghe so much was his output, effort and dedication. I just cannot give fighters who pose, run, hug and don't actually throw ANY punches much credit. Dirrell was a bitch before the fight and then went ahead and fought like one. Pathetic. He didn't do enough to take Froch's title.

He probably could have had he applied himself, but he didn't and so he lost. I have no qualms with that. If he had fought more like he did in the 11th there wouldn't even be any need for any debate.

Miles, explain what Froch did that was effective aggression. Who threw the more effective punches?

You seem to be basing much of this on a personal distaste for Dirrell rather than what actually happened. I didn't like how Dirrell fought, but the simple fact is he did more & was robbed.

Malignaggi threw loads of ineffective punches, not actually landing that much, with Diaz 'coming forward' to make a fight of it, in fact he at least connected at a higher percentage. It seems like you've got a major double standard here.