Froch v Kessler - challenge

[Gandalf]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

[HattonTheHammer]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

From someone who has seen it a dozen or so times and scored it on every single occasion let me assure you, FROCH WON

[ICB]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

Oh yea he did trust me look in the other thread, he had it 115-113 for John Ruiz. He also had Joe Frazier ahead going into the last round vs Muhammad Ali, in there 3rd fight.

I mean honestly WTF, these can't be serious scores can they ? and in what part of the fight did Carl Froch whoop Mikkel Kessler ?

It actually pisses me off, when a person keeps claiming lies. I mean no one else i've seen on any boxing forum, had Carl Froch winning.

I mean i can understand Ono thinking Carl Froch maybe edged it. Although i personally don't understand how he did, but still thats reasonable enough.

But a 4 point or wider win for Carl Froch, is just fucking a joke. Considering 90 percent of boxing fans feel Mikkel Kessler won by atleast 2 rounds or more, but then again were all wrong and HTH is right because he's Saddo legend.

Give me a fucking break.

[HattonTheHammer]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

Oh yea he did trust me look in the other thread, he had it 115-113 for John Ruiz. He also had Joe Frazier ahead going into the last round vs Muhammad Ali, in there 3rd fight.

I mean honestly WTF, these can't be serious scores can they ? and in what part of the fight did Carl Froch whoop Mikkel Kessler ?

It actually pisses me off, when a person keeps claiming lies. I mean no one else i've seen on any boxing forum, had Carl Froch winning.

I mean i can understand Ono thinking Carl Froch maybe edged it. Although i personally don't understand how he did, but still thats reasonable enough.

But a 4 point or wider win for Carl Froch, is just fucking a joke. Considering 90 percent of boxing fans feel Mikkel Kessler won by atleast 2 rounds or more, but then again were all wrong and HTH is right because he's Saddo legend.

Give me a fucking break.

ruiz-jones - every single fricking time jones landed the crowd would go wild everytime ruiz hit jones not a thing was said. The whole spectacle was created for a middleweight to become heavyweight champ of the world but in reality jones flurries were few and far between and the majority of the fight was dominated by ruiz 115-113 ruiz

Ali-frazier 3 - you honestly telling me that wasnt a close fight?

froch-kessler - many well respected journalists claim froch got a rough deal, does that make them "liars"?? as ive rightfully pointed too plenty of times over when youve seen a fight over and over again you have the right to state who won it. Froch won end of story

[erics44]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

watch it again dude

kessler doesnt land a meaningful punch till the 6th

a couple of close early rounds which froch lands more punches, then by the 5th it looks like froch is gonna walk it, then kessler has a couple of good rounds, probly his best of the fight and in the 8th froch starts to get back on top, in the 11th kessler looks completely gone

someone laughed in the other thread because hth scored the 8th to kessler, i dont see whats funny, kes landed 1 punch in the round, all be it his best of the fight, but you dont win a round off one punch

[ICB]

Wow

But then again atleast its not as bad, as HTH having John Ruiz beating Roy Jones.

He didn't did he?

I supported Froch, but thought he lost a competitive fight. Only seen it twice and didn't score it.

watch it again dude

kessler doesnt land a meaningful punch till the 6th

a couple of close early rounds which froch lands more punches, then by the 5th it looks like froch is gonna walk it, then kessler has a couple of good rounds, probly his best of the fight and in the 8th froch starts to get back on top, in the 11th kessler looks completely gone

someone laughed in the other thread because hth scored the 8th to kessler, i dont see whats funny, kes landed 1 punch in the round, all be it his best of the fight, but you dont win a round off one punch

Whats the point of watching it again ? it wasn't that controversial that it needs repeated viewing's. A majority of the boxing fans had Mikkel Kessler winning by atleast 2 or 3 rounds.

And Carl Froch never whooped anyone, and he never looked like walking it. I think you need to take those glasses off, you and your mate HTH. Because your both making yourself look silly.

I mean do you think a majority of boxing fans having Mikkel Kessler, as the winner is all because we have some sort of vendetta against Carl Froch ? what about the other British fans having Mikkel Kessler winning ? most of the British fans had Mikkel Kessler as the winner.

He was the aggressor, he had the better workrate. He landed a good steady amount of punches to the body and head. And if it was on the line going into the 12th round, Mikkel Kessler pulled it out and was a clear winning by a few rounds.

Now im just watching round 8 now, and i'll talk you through what im seeing. I see Carl Froch pocking out slow jabs not landing, Mikkel Kessler coming forward and throwing not landing many, but he is the aggressor and all Carl Froch is doing is backing up throwing slow jabs which are not landing. Mikkel Kessler lands a big right hand 56 seconds to go in the round, that staggers Carl Froch. Mikkel Kessler goes to the body and head. He's got Carl Froch up against the ropes, two jabs and a right hand from Mikkel Kessler.

Again a clear round for Mikkel Kessler, Carl Froch done nothing in that round. Mikkel Kessler was the one coming forward, he threw more punches. Landed the best punch of the round, and he had Carl Froch up against the ropes at the end of the round. So just explain how you had Carl Froch winning that round ?

[erics44]

Whats the point of watching it again ? it wasn't that controversial that it needs repeated viewing's. A majority of the boxing fans had Mikkel Kessler winning by atleast 2 or 3 rounds.

I have just watched it and i dont believe anyone who knows anything about boxing could have kessler as much as drawing the fight

i watched it at the time drunk, listening to the commentry and i thought it was close and could have gone either way, it wasnt, froch won and it wasnt close

after watching it i would say kesslers best days are behind him, he wasnt competative for much of the fight

[erics44]

also dude froch wasnt staggered, that one punch kes landed in round 8 was his best of the fight and froch was slightly off ballance

you are either watching the fight through froch hating glasses or you cant admit you are wrong

[ICB]

also dude froch wasnt staggered, that one punch kes landed in round 8 was his best of the fight and froch was slightly off ballance

you are either watching the fight through froch hating glasses or you cant admit you are wrong

Carl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.

You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.

Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.

Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.

[erics44]

also dude froch wasnt staggered, that one punch kes landed in round 8 was his best of the fight and froch was slightly off ballance

you are either watching the fight through froch hating glasses or you cant admit you are wrong

Carl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.

You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.

Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.

Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.

i have argued back, kessler landed 1 punch in that round froch landed many, admittedly it was one of kesslers better rounds but he didnt win it

like i said before, you dont win a round on 1 punch

and kessler had froch on the ropes in the fight on a few occasions including the 8th, i can tell you now on all thjose occasions combined kessler didnt land a punch of any meaning

i dont think the majority of boxing fans would have froch winning the fight if they watched it without the commentary and were completely non biast

i can almost understand people making a case for saying froch lost to dirrell because dirrel landed maybe even as many punches, even tho they were all on the run, in the kessler fight froch out landed him several to little

froch won of that there is no doubt

[ICB]

also dude froch wasnt staggered, that one punch kes landed in round 8 was his best of the fight and froch was slightly off ballance

you are either watching the fight through froch hating glasses or you cant admit you are wrong

Carl Froch dipped down when he got hit by that punch, he was hurt and he for certain felt the weight of that punch. Again you made this thread saying "challenge". Well i challenged your scoring in the 8th round, i gave very good examples of why i felt Mikkel Kessler won the round.

You haven't been able to argue back, why you felt Carl Froch won the round. Because you can't, Carl Froch landed nothing that in that round. And all he did was back up throwing slow jabs that were missing.

Infact i don't think either man really landed anything in the 1st half of the round, but in the 2nd half of the round. Mikkel Kessler landed the big right hand which made Carl Froch dip. He backed up Carl Froch towards the ropes, he also landed another right hand near the end of the round, which clearly gave Mikkel Kessler the round.

Lastly how am i wrong ? the official judges had Mikkel Kessler winning a UD. The majority of the boxing fans would agree with me that Mikkel Kessler won, so what am i wrong about ? you and HTH are the only ones that have the ridiculous scores. Which speaks volumes really.

i have argued back, kessler landed 1 punch in that round froch landed many, admittedly it was one of kesslers better rounds but he didnt win it

like i said before, you dont win a round on 1 punch

and kessler had froch on the ropes in the fight on a few occasions including the 8th, i can tell you now on all thjose occasions combined kessler didnt land a punch of any meaning

i dont think the majority of boxing fans would have froch winning the fight if they watched it without the commentary and were completely non biast

i can almost understand people making a case for saying froch lost to dirrell because dirrel landed maybe even as many punches, even tho they were all on the run, in the kessler fight froch out landed him several to little

froch won of that there is no doubt

Again what punches did Carl Froch land ? examples ? Carl Froch was backing up throwing slow jabs. Mikkel Kessler was the aggressor, landed the best punch in an uneventful round.

Its like im talking to a brick wall here, you can't be serious. I mean honestly tell me this is wind up, and your just trying to get a rise out of people ? how many people watch fights without sound ?

The way your making it sound, its like this is the worst robbery of the last decade. It would make no difference if you watched it on the moon, under water, on the tv, on the computer, with sound, without sound.

Carl Froch lost get over it, the reason a majority of boxing fans. And some of them know alot more about the sport than you do. And have watched 100's more fights, had Mikkel Kessler winning is because he did win legitmately.

As i've told you and your mate HTH, 100's of times. Yet you both bring up the same pitiful argument. Mikkel Kessler was coming forward, he landed the better punches, he had the better workrate, he closed out the fight in style in the last round.

How hard is that too understand ? i don't care how many times you watch it, while you and your mate HTH are fantasizing over Carl Froch. And giving random rounds to Carl Froch he clearly lost.

It won't make no difference, Carl Froch lost legitmately end of.

[CFH]

I think I had it 115-113 Froch. It' s been a long time since I saw the fight though.

Maybe we can do this one in the 'Controversial Fights' thread next week if there's enough demand.

[armin]

I really don't get where the fuss for this fight is coming from, to have froch winning 117-111, is as bad as one judge having the martinez williams fight 119-111 for williams. It was a fairly close fight in which the right man won, sorry froch just didn't seem to want it as badly tho I don't think. Backing up for most of the fight isn't going to win you the fight if you're not outlanding the dude and making him miss, which froch didn't do. Erics 44 you say kess' best day are behind him and you're right, his 1-2 doesn't look nowhere near as crisp as it used to be, but then if his days are behind him what's that say about froch?

[erics44]

I really don't get where the fuss for this fight is coming from, to have froch winning 117-111, is as bad as one judge having the martinez williams fight 119-111 for williams. It was a fairly close fight in which the right man won, sorry froch just didn't seem to want it as badly tho I don't think. Backing up for most of the fight isn't going to win you the fight if you're not outlanding the dude and making him miss, which froch didn't do. Erics 44 you say kess' best day are behind him and you're right, his 1-2 doesn't look nowhere near as crisp as it used to be, but then if his days are behind him what's that say about froch?

froch was on the money that night

still looks crisp

which rounds did kes win?

[Therebelsin]

Likekessler. Better. Hate. Froch