Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 47

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

Share/Bookmark
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2075
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus View Post
    He said genuine achievement... lol
    Are you confusing the word genuine with huge?


    Do you call feats such as literally wrestling a win away from a ring rusty old man or robbing a paper champion of his alphabet strap as genuine achievements?

    the majority of hatton's big wins he was either allowed to wrestle and/or he was facing an old fighter... outside of that he looked like relative rubbish against a load of B level fighters when defending... guys like luczano and until that left hook... mausa, but it was always because he had a fucking cold or something.

    he was a decent world level fighter, but it is stupid how highly some people rate him. he is certainatly no better than froch.

    But who knows, if Froch was managed by Frank Warren then he'd probably be getting steered toward loads of WBO type fighters too.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2075
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mars_ax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGB View Post
    Boxing's not a popularity contest...

    (or a pie eating contest)
    Just saying, Hatton was adored by his fans in the UK, I don't believe even Calzaghe got that kind of adoration.
    Floyd Mayweahter doesn't either.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2075
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
    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.
    I'm more talking relativly when compared to the level of credit they get from their own countryman... objectivly they're about the same... but Carl isn't done yet.

    I also have to say that although the Kosta and Castillo fights were good, that he wrestled them and they weren't exactly spring chickens... particularly in castillos case.... clever match making to set up a shot at floyd.

  4. #34
    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?

    Ricky Hatton is what we call a " manufactured product "... Warren made him and promoted him so well that many people were fooled into thinking that he's greater than what he really was. All thanks to warren .. Hatton is a perfect example of a fighter who rose to fame through careful matchmaking..

    Think of Dibella/Andre Berto but to a lesser extent..

  5. #35
    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.

  6. #36
    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!!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11,430
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2075
    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.

  8. #38
    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

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    6,763
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1307
    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.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    8,466
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1394
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mars_ax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGB View Post
    Boxing's not a popularity contest...

    (or a pie eating contest)
    Just saying, Hatton was adored by his fans in the UK, I don't believe even Calzaghe got that kind of adoration.
    That's because Calzaghe didn't attach himself to a popular but down on their luck football team, like Hatton did.
    http://instagram.com/jonnyboy_85_/

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    10,364
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1391
    Cool Clicks

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ono View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Mars_ax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGB View Post
    Boxing's not a popularity contest...

    (or a pie eating contest)
    Just saying, Hatton was adored by his fans in the UK, I don't believe even Calzaghe got that kind of adoration.
    That's because Calzaghe didn't attach himself to a popular but down on their luck football team, like Hatton did.
    Nailed it! Ono ftw!

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    South London Baby
    Posts
    5,330
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1703
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
    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.
    This sums up how I feel. Over their careers it's about even. Froch would need to either beat Ward or have a real close fight to surpass him for me. I think Hatton gets a lot of criticism these days, but his resume is not as bad as some make out.

    On the Dirrell thing, I'm one of those 'fools' who believes he didn't fake the reaction, as I've seen someone react near on exactly the same after getting sparked in sparring & I also know from personal experience how contrived genuine responses can look on camera. Still, maybe if I hadn't seen those I'd also believe he was acting, but I have & the fighter deserves the benefit of the doubt.

    However, I don't believe the neurological thing that came up afterwards, I'm sure that was his team's way of getting out of the fight with Ward, which could have seriously derailed his marketability. So no imo the neurological issues weren't legit. His team have seriously fucked his future, keeping him out of the ring for a year & half & making every commission look extra hard at him.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    732
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    813
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JazMerkin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
    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.
    This sums up how I feel. Over their careers it's about even. Froch would need to either beat Ward or have a real close fight to surpass him for me. I think Hatton gets a lot of criticism these days, but his resume is not as bad as some make out.

    On the Dirrell thing, I'm one of those 'fools' who believes he didn't fake the reaction, as I've seen someone react near on exactly the same after getting sparked in sparring & I also know from personal experience how contrived genuine responses can look on camera. Still, maybe if I hadn't seen those I'd also believe he was acting, but I have & the fighter deserves the benefit of the doubt.

    However, I don't believe the neurological thing that came up afterwards, I'm sure that was his team's way of getting out of the fight with Ward, which could have seriously derailed his marketability. So no imo the neurological issues weren't legit. His team have seriously fucked his future, keeping him out of the ring for a year & half & making every commission look extra hard at him.


    I couldn't agree more. This long layoff can't be good for him, not to mention all the test he's going to have to go through to prove he is "healed". That's why i wanted to see what everyone thought. If it wasn't legit then why put himself through all the BS that comes with it, test, not making money fighting etc. But i do think it was BS and he was so far into it he had to ride it out.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    6,763
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1307
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MMASUX View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JazMerkin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
    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.
    This sums up how I feel. Over their careers it's about even. Froch would need to either beat Ward or have a real close fight to surpass him for me. I think Hatton gets a lot of criticism these days, but his resume is not as bad as some make out.

    On the Dirrell thing, I'm one of those 'fools' who believes he didn't fake the reaction, as I've seen someone react near on exactly the same after getting sparked in sparring & I also know from personal experience how contrived genuine responses can look on camera. Still, maybe if I hadn't seen those I'd also believe he was acting, but I have & the fighter deserves the benefit of the doubt.

    However, I don't believe the neurological thing that came up afterwards, I'm sure that was his team's way of getting out of the fight with Ward, which could have seriously derailed his marketability. So no imo the neurological issues weren't legit. His team have seriously fucked his future, keeping him out of the ring for a year & half & making every commission look extra hard at him.


    I couldn't agree more. This long layoff can't be good for him, not to mention all the test he's going to have to go through to prove he is "healed". That's why i wanted to see what everyone thought. If it wasn't legit then why put himself through all the BS that comes with it, test, not making money fighting etc. But i do think it was BS and he was so far into it he had to ride it out.
    Well, it's possible they weighed the options and thought it was worse for Dirrell if he took a bad beating at the hands of Ward, followed by being knocked out of the S6 in the first round after going 0-2 with one DQ win. Then where is he? Or take the time off to regroup and gradually return to the ring. He still comes away with the exposure the S6 brought and he wasn't humiliated by being knocked out early.

    The above-poster was spot-on that said the dq ko by AA was legit but the severity of the injury was exaggerated in order to avoid fighting and losing to Ward.

    The primary problem I see for Dirrell now is that he avoided the Ward fight, but now the only way he'll be seen as legit again at 168 is if he fights Ward. So, at the end of the day, dodging Ward just pushed back the inevitable. Maybe he can make some $ in the meantime.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sunderland, England
    Posts
    1,705
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    874
    Cool Clicks

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post

    Well, it's possible they weighed the options and thought it was worse for Dirrell if he took a bad beating at the hands of Ward, followed by being knocked out of the S6 in the first round after going 0-2 with one DQ win. Then where is he? Or take the time off to regroup and gradually return to the ring. He still comes away with the exposure the S6 brought and he wasn't humiliated by being knocked out early.

    The above-poster was spot-on that said the dq ko by AA was legit but the severity of the injury was exaggerated in order to avoid fighting and losing to Ward.

    The primary problem I see for Dirrell now is that he avoided the Ward fight, but now the only way he'll be seen as legit again at 168 is if he fights Ward. So, at the end of the day, dodging Ward just pushed back the inevitable. Maybe he can make some $ in the meantime.
    They probably looked at it and thought a fight with Ward would generate more money further down the line. I don't think it was that he didn't want to fight Ward, I just think he didn't want to fight Ward at that time, for that money. Presuming Ward wins the S6 and Dirrell picks up a few good wins on his comeback trail the fight would surely be better for both fighters financially then it would have been in November. Especially given that the contracts all the fighters signed at the beginning of the tourney gave them a fixed purse for all their bouts.

    The problem to me is, how easy will it be to get licensed?The neurological problems were stupid imo although the only way for him to be able to withdraw from the S6 was to have some sort of serious injury. I do think the KO was legit against Abraham but I really doubt he had any lasting problems because of it.

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