Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47

Thread: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

Share/Bookmark

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    18,672
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    It's not as if Dirrell was hurt enough to a point where should have been on the canvas, convulsing like an infantile retard but he did take a half swing from a heavy-handed Abraham unexpectedly so i i think his brain was scrambled for a good sec. But When he started saying some weird shit like I got Knocked out blah blah, I thought that was bogus kinda like when Oscar won the Oscar for that performance he put on with Hopkins. But anyway, Im a big fan of Dirrell's style and i give him all the credit for the way he fought Abe.. During the fight at least, he fought like a real fighter and was on his way to a UD victory anyways..

    Direll has a bad ass style..
    Dirrell style is garbage. It's not even a set style. It's a mixture of occasional striker/majority show-boater/ runner/whiner. There's no denying his skills and talent. He either just doesn't know how to really use it or isn't as confidence in them as he likes people to think he is. The Curtis Stevens fight (if you can call it that) was an embarrassment to both fighters. But mostly him. I think Dirrell got screwed against Fraud. But in reality the fight shouldn't even of been close if Dirrell would of fought the way he was suppose to. The Abraham fight was a great work. For 8 rounds. Than he started hitting the wall. He didn't trip. It was a legit knock down. He was fading pretty fast in that fight I don't think Abraham would of caught him in time. But there was no way Dirrell was gonna take that chance. He saw a way and took it. Dirrell so far is a waste of talent

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    10,364
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1430
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    V, do you really think Carl Froch is Fraud?
    Hidden Content
    Original & Best: The Sugar Man

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2114
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    lol... Calling carl an all time great or a top 5 p4p fighter may be a bit too much... But to call him 'fraud'? You're either retarded or trolling. He is nothing but 100% legit.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,272
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Carl Froch is bad bad man.. He's a battle tested warrior who has proved himself over and over against the best.. That's no fraud..

    A fraud is someone like Ricky Hatton.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2114
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Was talking with a client the other day and both agreeing that Froch is way ahead of Hatton when it comes to genuine achievement but seems to get a fraction of the recognition from his countrymen.

    He should drink, smoke, snort and constantly go on about it between fights more.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,272
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGB View Post
    Was talking with a client the other day and both agreeing that Froch is way ahead of Hatton when it comes to genuine achievement but seems to get a fraction of the recognition from his countrymen.

    He should drink, smoke, snort and constantly go on about it between fights more.
    He should also try running into the ringpost face-first or get knocked out flat on his back in the second round. Maybe that'll boost his popularity.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    6,763
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1346
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Lest we forget, Ricky Hatton was the lineal champ at 140 for a good four years. He defeated two future HOF's in Kosta Tszyu and Jose Luis Castillo. He held the IBO, IBF, and WBA belts at one point.

    Carl Froch has done very well, but at this point, his resume is at best on par with Hatton's, not much better than Hatton's. His best win is over Jean Pascal. Glen Johnson is a good win, but let's not get too carried away, he does have over 10 losses and he is 42. The Dirrell win was just a horrible fight, and objectively, Dirrell wasn't a champion, and Dirrell's biggest true victory is over Curtis Stevens (AA win was a DQ). Abraham is a former champion at middleweight, but he isn't a super middleweight. Jermain Taylor same. Don't get me wrong, Carl gets credit for those wins without a doubt. However, when Froch stepped up to an elite level fighter (although I would say overrated too) at his weight in Kessler, he lost. Froch also has never beat an assured HOF although perhaps arguably Jermain will make it to the hall. Froch's career at this point and Hatton's career overall are comparable, but Carl just doesn't have the career-defining win that Hatton did in Tszyu. I don't consider his win over Taylor or Pascal to be as good as Hatton's over Tszyu. A win over Ward might just be such a win.

    Please don't mistake this as an argument that Froch isn't a badass dude because he is - he fights anyone, anywhere, and always comes to fight. I was at the Jermain Taylor fight rooting for Jermain (as a patriot should ), and Carl won me over in that fight. He never gave up when he was down on points and he fought till the end with the crowd rooting against him.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6,903
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGB View Post
    Was talking with a client the other day and both agreeing that Froch is way ahead of Hatton when it comes to genuine achievement but seems to get a fraction of the recognition from his countrymen.

    He should drink, smoke, snort and constantly go on about it between fights more.
    Is Froch really ahead of Hatton in genuine achievement? Hatton was able to build a huge fan base and supporters in the UK because he was well liked, Froch simply isn't as popular.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6,903
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    My own personal theory is, Dirrell was winning the fight, but Abraham had been slowly getting to him with hard shots. By the time the 11th round rolled around, Dirrell was getting desperate, close to being stopped and looking for a way out, Abraham conveniently provided him with one. Dirrell basically just quit, that's my 2 cents.
    Last edited by Mars_ax; 06-11-2011 at 10:41 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2114
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Boxing's not a popularity contest...

    (or a pie eating contest)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    18,672
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    Carl Froch is bad bad man.. He's a battle tested warrior who has proved himself over and over against the best.. That's no fraud..

    A fraud is someone like Ricky Hatton.
    He's a fraud based on the way he's viewed. I've heard some call him a great fighter? Are you fucking kidding me? I'll let good slide when talking about him. Great is just stupidity. People are getting fooled by his recent fights. Thinking he's more than he is. Showing there true stupidity.

    He holds a win over Jermaine Taylor. But he didn't really beat Taylor. Taylor and that suspect stamina of his his beat Taylor. Everybody, including the announcers were waiting for the fade to come up. Carl was just at the right place at the right time. You replace Carl with lets say Brian McGee and you got the same outcome. Taylor running out of gas. Than you got the gift that was the Dirrell fight. Watching this fight a couple of times and I see no way possible Fraud won. You put this fight in fucking Jupiter or Saturn and you got a clear Dirrell win. Only in moronic Nottingham is this a Fraud win. Not only that but they had him winning by 3 points. 3 fucking points! What the fuck were they scoring? How was Carl scoring points? The rabbit punches? The throw downs? Those ain't point scoring activities. I don't deny Dirrell ran like a coward and at times held like a queer. But he still landed more scoring punches. That can't be ignored. Based on that it really is an easy Dirrell win. Fraud's whore was already in Dirrell's locker room with her panties off thinking her current meal ticket had lost. It was that clear. After robbing Dirrell, Fraud gets out fought by a close to being shot, one eye Kessler. Does he take the loss like a man? No. He whines and complains like a bitch. Than he threatens to withdraw from the tournament if he was forced to honor the contract he willingly signed and made to fight in his opponents backyard. Some warrior. After reaching a compromise that isn't even necessary he beats the oh so mediocre Arthur Abraham. He reaches the finals by beating 97 year old Glen Johnson. While I too had Carl winning the fight, it was by no means a 6 point win for him. Clearly the judge was in the pocket. Just in case. Really Carl's best win is over Jean Pascal. A fighter who is in the same boat as Carl. Not as good as he's made out to be.

    The Ward fight is it for Fraud. He beats him and everything disappears. He becomes legit. If he loses (like expected) in a way like Green or Kessler lost and he proves the name Fraud stands.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,272
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    Carl Froch is bad bad man.. He's a battle tested warrior who has proved himself over and over against the best.. That's no fraud..

    A fraud is someone like Ricky Hatton.
    He's a fraud based on the way he's viewed. I've heard some call him a great fighter? Are you fucking kidding me? I'll let good slide when talking about him. Great is just stupidity. People are getting fooled by his recent fights. Thinking he's more than he is. Showing there true stupidity.

    He holds a win over Jermaine Taylor. But he didn't really beat Taylor. Taylor and that suspect stamina of his his beat Taylor. Everybody, including the announcers were waiting for the fade to come up. Carl was just at the right place at the right time. You replace Carl with lets say Brian McGee and you got the same outcome. Taylor running out of gas. Than you got the gift that was the Dirrell fight. Watching this fight a couple of times and I see no way possible Fraud won. You put this fight in fucking Jupiter or Saturn and you got a clear Dirrell win. Only in moronic Nottingham is this a Fraud win. Not only that but they had him winning by 3 points. 3 fucking points! What the fuck were they scoring? How was Carl scoring points? The rabbit punches? The throw downs? Those ain't point scoring activities. I don't deny Dirrell ran like a coward and at times held like a queer. But he still landed more scoring punches. That can't be ignored. Based on that it really is an easy Dirrell win. Fraud's whore was already in Dirrell's locker room with her panties off thinking her current meal ticket had lost. It was that clear. After robbing Dirrell, Fraud gets out fought by a close to being shot, one eye Kessler. Does he take the loss like a man? No. He whines and complains like a bitch. Than he threatens to withdraw from the tournament if he was forced to honor the contract he willingly signed and made to fight in his opponents backyard. Some warrior. After reaching a compromise that isn't even necessary he beats the oh so mediocre Arthur Abraham. He reaches the finals by beating 97 year old Glen Johnson. While I too had Carl winning the fight, it was by no means a 6 point win for him. Clearly the judge was in the pocket. Just in case. Really Carl's best win is over Jean Pascal. A fighter who is in the same boat as Carl. Not as good as he's made out to be.

    The Ward fight is it for Fraud. He beats him and everything disappears. He becomes legit. If he loses (like expected) in a way like Green or Kessler lost and he proves the name Fraud stands.
    I can tell you're a big fan of Froch. lol It's a subjective view and although I think he's a legitimate bad ass, Im not one of those people who regard him as a great fighter. NOt yet.. . He still has some more to prove before he can be mentioned amongs the greats but I think he has made the most out of what he has. I dont think he's that skilled like some people say but we got to give him credit for his mental toughness. Froch has so much belief in himself that he's beating people who he shouldnt be beating.. Say what you want but that is an exceptional fighter. Is he great? Not yet, but, he's pretty dam SPECIAL in my eyes.

    Oh c'mon bro, you're trying to discredit him of the taylor victory but that was kind of like Margarito/Cotto.. Besides the fact that Taylor had stamina issues, he also had poor punch resistance and was unable to take as much as he dished out. That's why he lost.. Are we going to blame Froch for Taylor's poor stamina ? It was a great victory.. and no way Brian Magee doesnt beat taylor..

    I totally agree with you on the Dirrell fight though... Froch got a semi-gift... But he does deserve alot of credit for outboxing Abraham. IT's not so much that he beat Abraham, but it's the way he beat him. Nobody knew Froch had that kind of boxing ability but in that fight, he proved to be more than a one trick pony and that's what makes that victory even sweeter..

    If Pascal was the only big name on his resume, yea, i guess he could be overlooked but he proved to be a versatile fighter bout after bout against top notch competition so I dont understand how you can underrate him so much.. He's beaten fighters of all different kinds of styles and that's no easy task.. Thing is, Froch wasn't even the favorite to win the tournament but look where he's at now!!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2114
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    I'd love to know who's calling him a great?

    He's a genuine world class fighter who'll take on anybody anywhere. You can't get more legit. Simple as that.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    18,672
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    Carl Froch is bad bad man.. He's a battle tested warrior who has proved himself over and over against the best.. That's no fraud..

    A fraud is someone like Ricky Hatton.
    He's a fraud based on the way he's viewed. I've heard some call him a great fighter? Are you fucking kidding me? I'll let good slide when talking about him. Great is just stupidity. People are getting fooled by his recent fights. Thinking he's more than he is. Showing there true stupidity.

    He holds a win over Jermaine Taylor. But he didn't really beat Taylor. Taylor and that suspect stamina of his his beat Taylor. Everybody, including the announcers were waiting for the fade to come up. Carl was just at the right place at the right time. You replace Carl with lets say Brian McGee and you got the same outcome. Taylor running out of gas. Than you got the gift that was the Dirrell fight. Watching this fight a couple of times and I see no way possible Fraud won. You put this fight in fucking Jupiter or Saturn and you got a clear Dirrell win. Only in moronic Nottingham is this a Fraud win. Not only that but they had him winning by 3 points. 3 fucking points! What the fuck were they scoring? How was Carl scoring points? The rabbit punches? The throw downs? Those ain't point scoring activities. I don't deny Dirrell ran like a coward and at times held like a queer. But he still landed more scoring punches. That can't be ignored. Based on that it really is an easy Dirrell win. Fraud's whore was already in Dirrell's locker room with her panties off thinking her current meal ticket had lost. It was that clear. After robbing Dirrell, Fraud gets out fought by a close to being shot, one eye Kessler. Does he take the loss like a man? No. He whines and complains like a bitch. Than he threatens to withdraw from the tournament if he was forced to honor the contract he willingly signed and made to fight in his opponents backyard. Some warrior. After reaching a compromise that isn't even necessary he beats the oh so mediocre Arthur Abraham. He reaches the finals by beating 97 year old Glen Johnson. While I too had Carl winning the fight, it was by no means a 6 point win for him. Clearly the judge was in the pocket. Just in case. Really Carl's best win is over Jean Pascal. A fighter who is in the same boat as Carl. Not as good as he's made out to be.

    The Ward fight is it for Fraud. He beats him and everything disappears. He becomes legit. If he loses (like expected) in a way like Green or Kessler lost and he proves the name Fraud stands.
    I can tell you're a big fan of Froch. lol It's a subjective view and although I think he's a legitimate bad ass, Im not one of those people who regard him as a great fighter. NOt yet.. . He still has some more to prove before he can be mentioned amongs the greats but I think he has made the most out of what he has. I dont think he's that skilled like some people say but we got to give him credit for his mental toughness. Froch has so much belief in himself that he's beating people who he shouldnt be beating.. Say what you want but that is an exceptional fighter. Is he great? Not yet, but, he's pretty dam SPECIAL in my eyes.

    Oh c'mon bro, you're trying to discredit him of the taylor victory but that was kind of like Margarito/Cotto.. Besides the fact that Taylor had stamina issues, he also had poor punch resistance and was unable to take as much as he dished out. That's why he lost.. Are we going to blame Froch for Taylor's poor stamina ? It was a great victory.. and no way Brian Magee doesnt beat taylor..

    I totally agree with you on the Dirrell fight though... Froch got a semi-gift... But he does deserve alot of credit for outboxing Abraham. IT's not so much that he beat Abraham, but it's the way he beat him. Nobody knew Froch had that kind of boxing ability but in that fight, he proved to be more than a one trick pony and that's what makes that victory even sweeter..

    If Pascal was the only big name on his resume, yea, i guess he could be overlooked but he proved to be a versatile fighter bout after bout against top notch competition so I dont understand how you can underrate him so much.. He's beaten fighters of all different kinds of styles and that's no easy task.. Thing is, Froch wasn't even the favorite to win the tournament but look where he's at now!!
    Like who? He lost to Kessler. The Dirrell fight was a gift. Everybody else he was favored to win. Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't Carl threatened to withdraw out the tournament if he didn't get his way? Yeah some bad ass

    And while your right you can't blame him for Taylor's stamina problems, how much credit can you really give him for something everybody knew and was waiting to happen? From like the 7th round round on the Show Time crew was asking when is Taylor gonna fade. Everybody knew it was coming. And really how much credit you really think he should get for out boxing Abraham? This tournament has answered several questions and exposed many things. One of them being how good a fighter Abraham is not. Like I said, Fraud beats Ward and he becomes legit

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    6,763
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1346
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita View Post
    Carl Froch is bad bad man.. He's a battle tested warrior who has proved himself over and over against the best.. That's no fraud..

    A fraud is someone like Ricky Hatton.
    He's a fraud based on the way he's viewed. I've heard some call him a great fighter? Are you fucking kidding me? I'll let good slide when talking about him. Great is just stupidity. People are getting fooled by his recent fights. Thinking he's more than he is. Showing there true stupidity.

    He holds a win over Jermaine Taylor. But he didn't really beat Taylor. Taylor and that suspect stamina of his his beat Taylor. Everybody, including the announcers were waiting for the fade to come up. Carl was just at the right place at the right time. You replace Carl with lets say Brian McGee and you got the same outcome. Taylor running out of gas. Than you got the gift that was the Dirrell fight. Watching this fight a couple of times and I see no way possible Fraud won. You put this fight in fucking Jupiter or Saturn and you got a clear Dirrell win. Only in moronic Nottingham is this a Fraud win. Not only that but they had him winning by 3 points. 3 fucking points! What the fuck were they scoring? How was Carl scoring points? The rabbit punches? The throw downs? Those ain't point scoring activities. I don't deny Dirrell ran like a coward and at times held like a queer. But he still landed more scoring punches. That can't be ignored. Based on that it really is an easy Dirrell win. Fraud's whore was already in Dirrell's locker room with her panties off thinking her current meal ticket had lost. It was that clear. After robbing Dirrell, Fraud gets out fought by a close to being shot, one eye Kessler. Does he take the loss like a man? No. He whines and complains like a bitch. Than he threatens to withdraw from the tournament if he was forced to honor the contract he willingly signed and made to fight in his opponents backyard. Some warrior. After reaching a compromise that isn't even necessary he beats the oh so mediocre Arthur Abraham. He reaches the finals by beating 97 year old Glen Johnson. While I too had Carl winning the fight, it was by no means a 6 point win for him. Clearly the judge was in the pocket. Just in case. Really Carl's best win is over Jean Pascal. A fighter who is in the same boat as Carl. Not as good as he's made out to be.

    The Ward fight is it for Fraud. He beats him and everything disappears. He becomes legit. If he loses (like expected) in a way like Green or Kessler lost and he proves the name Fraud stands.
    Calling him Fraud is severe though. Do you call Ward a fraud? Ward has beat who? Kessler is his defining victory and Kessler's best win was over Froch! Other than Kessler, who has Ward really beat? I give him credit for the Bika win but most people don't give him much credit for it. Bute beat Bika better too.

    Froch has travelled to fight his opponents. Ward has fought every single of his major fights in California. Have to respect Froch for traveling.

    His best win is over Pascal. Plain and simple. People were all over Bhop for drawing with Pascal and beating Pascal. Froch outright beat him. No if ands or buts about it. That is his only great win though. I agree with that.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Boxing and brain damage.
    By Taeth in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 12-07-2008, 01:02 PM
  2. "The Contender"... Finally legit!!!!!!!!!!
    By PRIDE OF BOSTON in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 08-10-2007, 06:46 PM
  3. Does Toney have BRAIN DAMAGE?
    By Lance Uppercut in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-06-2006, 12:38 PM
  4. brain damage
    By satori in forum Ask the Trainer
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-24-2006, 07:05 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing