The fight wasn't even close. A fight is judged by clean punches, effective aggression, ring generalship, and defense. I don't think anyone who watch this fight would disagree that Dirrell landed more, harder and more flush shots. I thought Dirrell was effective in keeping the fight at his distance and pace for 90% of the fight which is in the center of the ring. Dirrell and Froch have ring generalship. Dirrell used the ring effectively "running" avoiding punches and Froch cut the corners well time from time which cause holdings from Dirrell. They both foul btw. Dirrell hold and Carl rabbit punches and hip toss. So they both can be argue as good ring generals. However only Dirrell displayed good defense while Froch is basically non-existent. I know Dirrell won 3/4 critria easy and maybe even 4/4. Anyone who see it differently. I would love to hear how Froch won this match.
good analysis...I think what hurt Dirrell the most was the holding, I scored it 114-113 for Dirrell, but Froch did surpise me by his toughness, I though it was going to be a much easier night for Dirrell
Dirrell did hold but his penalty was also very harsh. Froch held at times, Head lock at times, hip toss but not even close to be penalize. And when do england people start penalizing for fouls when they are known to be rough anyways? Hatton punch and goes str8 to hold even when he is not in trouble and NEVER gets penalize. This match was as biase as it comes.
Some crazy dude told me that you have to score each round seperately and then add up the scores at the end! But I think he's just crazy...
The difference to me was that when there were no clinches.. when Froch had him against the ropes finally. Which happened about 10-15 times during the fight. There was Dirrell, right where Froch wanted him and what happened. What the **** happened. Froch threw 5-6 punch combos at air. Not even partially landing, not landing to the arms, body. Nothing just swsssshhhh air. The one shot he landed which they kept replaying was a left hook while Dirrell was backing up that Dirrell rolled and was not even slightly hurt though Froch tried to jump on him like he was hurt. Based on that punch the dumb bitches like Mackie and the euro commentators awared him the fight. Froch landed nothing of substance at all from long range and we seen what happened when Dirrell was cornered or in the clinch. Air and rabbit punches... and one body slam. Dirrell was leading with jabs to the body that was backing Froch up all fight every round. Jabbing to the head landing not missing ****. Not throwing a lot but not missing or not getting hit. Froch needed the point deduction just to have a shot and what happened. Dirrell erased that **** by kicking his ass the next few rounds clearly and easily.
I don't know why Dirrell is getting so much stick here. There are far more "boring" fighters around that run, hold and foul systematically that get much more respect. The poor bloke put on a good, skilled performance and got the wrong end of a bizarre decision.
You can't win a fight by "running". You need to control the fight to get ring generalship. And Aprat for 3-4 rounds (mostly at the end) Dirrells punches lacked snap and his jabs mostly lacked force. Froch landed many shots to Dirrells midsection while he was showboating. Dirrell had a few relatively dominant rounds, but that doesn't change the fact that he wasn't doing much for large parts of the fight. I scored it round for round and had Froch winning by 3. I don't see the controversy, seriously.
Get glasses. Dirrells punches were landing several inches short or hitting his gloves (apart from rds 10-12), while Frochs punches to the body were landing. It might look impressive from a distance, but on my 47 inch TV I could see Dirrell was landing short all night.
This is a pretty disgusting robbery and far worse than Paulie's. At least Diaz landed more harder shots so you can make an arguement but Dirrell landed the harder shots, landed more shots and hurt froch in the same round that he got deducted for leaning on froch. yes holding is a foul but a minor foul. Everytime Dirrell held Froch, froch was going to work holding and hitting fouling too. outside of his hold and hit he didn't land much of anything but air.