Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?

[blegit]

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.