Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?

[erics44]

i dont agree

i was scoring it round by round and froch won

you have to fight to win a fight

[amat]

It's not really worth debating this with you as you're views are pretty ludicrous (as if Dirrell is the first guy to run in afight), but you score a fight by clean punching, effective aggressiveness, ring generalship and defense. Dirrell was the only guy landing any clean punches, he controlled the distance the entire fight and oh yeah he barely ever got hit by anything. Even if Froch was somehow 'effectively aggressive' for 7 of the 12 rounds, no way that overcomes everything else. I don't know, I'm over it but to me it was a robbery.

[erics44]

It's not really worth debating this with you as you're views are pretty ludicrous (as if Dirrell is the first guy to run in afight), but you score a fight by clean punching, effective aggressiveness, ring generalship and defense. Dirrell was the only guy landing any clean punches, he controlled the distance the entire fight and oh yeah he barely ever got hit by anything. Even if Froch was somehow 'effectively aggressive' for 7 of the 12 rounds, no way that overcomes everything else. I don't know, I'm over it but to me it was a robbery.

i think what you are saying is ludicrous, in fact i am amazed you can have the view that someone doing so much running and clinching can win a fight

and yeah people win fights by running, but not to that extent

perhaps its you who it is not worth having the debate with

[Drago]

as i have not seen the fight i am gonna say froch