just watched the frankie gavin fight!

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by TFFP

In reality it was a very clear win for Gavin however you want to dress it up. Scoring it to Gavin by a few rounds or for Woodhouse is absolutely abysmal and giving far too much credit for meaningless pressure.

It’s turning into the Paul Williams effect. Lots of people score for aggression regardless of how effective it is. Too many people give no credit for defence and if you look at how many punches Woodhouse threw and how few landed, the excellent work Gavin did is clear. Then look at how many shots Gavin landed and how anyone thinks that fight was close is beyond me.

[icemax]

Originally Posted by TFFP

In reality it was a very clear win for Gavin however you want to dress it up. Scoring it to Gavin by a few rounds or for Woodhouse is absolutely abysmal and giving far too much credit for meaningless pressure.

It was a clear win for Gavin, no doubt about that but it certainly wasn't the whitewash that the amateurs on here would have us believe...fact of the matter is you only have to listen to Gavin being interviewed for FrankWanker TV after the fight to know it was nowhere near as dominating a performance as posters on here say. The fighter knows.

[DaveyboyEssexUK]

Originally Posted by dftaylor

It’s turning into the Paul Williams effect. Lots of people score for aggression regardless of how effective it is. Too many people give no credit for defence and if you look at how many punches Woodhouse threw and how few landed, the excellent work Gavin did is clear. Then look at how many shots Gavin landed and how anyone thinks that fight was close is beyond me.

*Lots of people score for aggression regardless of how effective it is.*

Yet you had the Mitchell Murray fight close and disregarded Mitchells skillful defence, he made Murray miss loads with his upper body movement, plus when on the ropes he was more effective than murray and landed the classier punches, while Murray burned himself out. Double standards...........