Why would dirrel need to act, he was going to win anyway...

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

He clearly was acting. He was on his way to being KO'ed. Abraham was getting stronger, and the ref clearly stole a knock down from him. That fight would have ended in the 11th.

Would of, could of.....

didn't.

Irrelevent.

Thanks for your contribution.
Sorry, Im tired of arguing the same thing over and over and then someone comes and posts the exact same false logic again.

Haha, then stop. It's not like your arguing with the same person over and over, it's just you you you you... Relax. It's not false logic.

Logic is defined by the application of knowledge and I think enough is known about both fighters to to assume that a stoppage (whether voluntary or involuntary) was still a viable outcome in that fight... Even at that point.

I'm not saying this is truth. No not at all... but to call it false logic IS actually nonsense. It's with the whole ''it's irrelevant'' opinion.

Again, I'm not really taking sides, I'm just opening up the dynamic of this supposedly black & white argument.




Lastly... Shouldn't Abraham be docked points for a disqualification? I mean it's not quite the same as loosing fairly, is it? The fact that AA is still top of the table is just wrong!