:yep Sorry that i lifted this off of the front page Ciani Q: Theres one more first round fight we havent touched on yet, and I was curious if you would share your views on Carl Frochs victory against Andre Dirrell? A: I saw the fight and I gave Froch the fight. Maybe Dirrell landed clean punches, but when he landed his punches he was finishing up by grabbing and not looking confident the way he should have. Its the difference between boxing in a confident matter and the fact that he was letting Froch manhandle him. That was what I thought was the factor in the fight and even though a lot of people thought that it was a bad decision, if I would have been in Andre Dirrells corner I wouldnt have complained. I thought he won the fight from clean blows but just the all around general boxing and mental and physical strength, Froch intimidated him. I thought the decision was fair but I dont know how Froch is going to hold up with the rest of the guys. Just his mental mindset means that hes a tough guy, because hes going to always be up to it all the time because he has supreme confidence in himself. He may have more confidence than anyone in the entire tournament. So to all the people who say those who thought froch won have a. not been boxing long enough b. havent been watching boxing long enough c. dont know anything about boxing go **** yourselves. Froch won the fight, get over it
It was a close fight and could have gone either way. Hearing this from someone as respected as Steward, I think at the very least, people should acknowledge that it was not a clear decision and respect the idea that other man won the fight. There has been too much "Dirrell won, you are ignorant and NO NOTHING" statements, and vice versa. This is boxing. Watching it on television versus being ringside is very different. And people have different methods of scoring. Just because someone's opinion does not match their own doesnt mean they are an imbecile. Their have been far FAR worst decisions and robberies than the Froch-Dirrell fight. Either man could have won and it would have been fair.
Quite ironic he says that when his own fighter constantly does the same thing !! Hit and hold..... It's OK for Wlad to win rounds that way but not Dirrell ????? I'm not bringing down Wlad, just making a parallel with both situations...
But your only using 1 part of his statment. Wlad might hold, but hes much more confident about it and he usually is the one man handling in the clinch. He isnt falling all over the place and people tend to respect his power. But i do see your point :think
Haven't seen a thread claiming Dirrell won the fight in quite some time and yet every now and then someone pops up saying "so and so claimed Froch won the fight". Obviously you wouldn't feel the need to continuously prove that he won the fight if you didn't have at least some suspicion about the judging/reffing. Either way, the only ones who need to get over are you guys and your bi-weekly threads posting someone's opinion who happens to agree with you. Its tired, move on.
x1000. I had it a draw, and I wasn't mad when Froch got the nod. And I agree that it's a tired subject, and I hope these two never fight each other again, and I can't wait for the next round of the Super 6.
Mannys an overrated trainer anyway. The only fighters he likes to train are tall rangy fighters he can't develop any other type of fighter, so **** em'. Dirrell clearly won that fight.
how does that make him overrated? He specializes in a certain style of fighter, and coaches them to become very good champions. Yea, thats overrated :yep turning wlad from the butt of a joke, to the undisputed heavy champ. Yea, your right he sucks as a trainer:rofl Anyway, the point is, steward knows more about boxing then anyone who posts on this forum. He probobly has forgotten more then maybe you and me will ever learn. That why is respect his opinion when it comes to judging fights. :good