Both great fights, but which was better? Being a countryman of Froch I feel I got more in to it, but just a week before after watching Jones Lebedev I was thinking there is not going to be a fight like this for a long time. What did you prefer?
Froch vs. Kessler I & II were better for pure two-way action. Jones vs. Lebedev was more about high drama in the overall narrative. Jones' style wasn't really particularly exciting (the way both Kessler's and Froch's are, especially complementing each other and bringing out the best qualities in each other) so it was largely fun because of Lebedev pressing his, and then all the drama from him being cut and swollen and Jones beginning to exploit that with his sharpshooting.
Agreed, Froch Kessler showed both there pure class, great tactician's and a great brawl from start to finish. Lebedev Jones was just a brutal slugfest but Froch Kessler gets my vote for the variety and consistent competitiveness of the fight.
Jones-Lebedev was a blood bath brawl that's already made it's place in history Froch-Kessler II was more of a display of boxing than a war, but nevertheless a fight that will stick in my memory for years to come
Jones vs. Lebedev. I thought Kessler/Froch II was disappointing. Good fight, but the first 6 rounds were somewhat boring...
