Froch vs Dirrel

I've seen it three times. The first two times I had the same scores - 8-4 Dirrell. When I watched it for the third time I was very surprised by the closeness of the fight. I had the fight a draw. I agree that Froch should have had a point deducted, most definitely.

My card:

1. Froch (extremely close)
2. Dirrell (very close)
3. Dirrell (close but clear)
4. Draw (extremely close)
5. Dirrell (very clear)
6. Froch (very clear)
7. Froch (close)
8. Froch (extremely close)
9. Dirrell (extremely close)
10. Dirrell (very clear)
11. Dirrell (outclassing)
12. Froch (extremely close)

6-5-1 Dirrell, 114-114

Explanation of the swing rounds:

1. Dirrell with some decent body shots and jabs. Froch with three right hands to the body which I view as effective. Not much to go by.

4. Bernstein said this round was too close to call. I agree.

8. I think Dirrell was at least slightly shook up in this round - he was hit by two very hard punches and clinched a lot after that. He was clearly winning the round before that so this scoring is controversial, I know.

9. Johnson thought this was a good Dirrell round - Bernstein that Froch was impressive. Both had their moments but Dirrell's work had more quality.

12. Dirrell did too little IMO. Froch's work was ugly and in-accurate but some of it was landing and he was the boss.

Froch did more work in the clinches than I previously thought. That's what baffled me the most. Not all of it was rabbit punches. Everybody was talking about Dirrell giving Froch problems but Froch clearly gave Dirrell problems too. He didn't just become a man in the AA fight, it was about styles too. Froch was alert all the time, used his range and waiting for mistakes to jump on whereas AA is inactive, shorter, more predictable and freezes when you punch him. I wouldn't seriously know who to pick in a rematch just like I wouldn't against AA.

Another thing that surprises me is that even though most have Dirrell winning, the rounds given to him differ. This should tell us all it was a very close fight. I can only score five rounds with certainty: 3, 5, 6, 10, 11. Anything from 7-5 Froch to 9-3 Dirrell goes.

"Taking the title" is BS IMO. If you win - you win. And Dirrell in reality only ran in the middle rounds which Froch, incidentally, swept. Froch was careful too.

 

So what swayed you to give Froch round 8? The left hook which was the only legal punch he landed in the round?

 

There is no way in gods green earth Froch deserves the 12th. Watch it again. NOTHING was landing. He shoeshined a little to Dirrells body at the end. Dirrell landed the biggest punch of the round, and more punches "being the boss" is not a judging criteria.

4 was a clear Dirrell round, landed more punches.

8 was a clear Dirrell round, landed more punches, although Froch landed the best shot of the round, not enough to give him the round based on one punch.


Otherwise its not a bad card and would basically be how I had it if you changed this rounds.

 

i had froch winning 11 rounds, as well as the point deduction

 

seriously though, dirrell faught like a *****, the truth is he has the tools, speed, and skill to rip froch apart that night, he was just too scared, shame cause he could quite easily have schooled froch

 

And misses most of his jabs. Dirrell still has the edge in punches landed.

Again, misses all of his punches. What work on the inside are you referring to? Right before Dirrell falls he lands a right hook to the body.

Dirrell lands a great counter at 1:30? You miss that did you?

Btw, whereis the body work?

You missed a 3 punch Combinations Dirrell lands at 52 seconds into the round.

Then Froch lands his left hook. The only punch he landed cleanly in the round.

So basically you gave Froch the round based on him missing a bunch of jabs, ignoring Dirrells big right hand counter at 1:30 and his 3 punch combination at 52 seconds.


Yeah I can see how you'd score this fight for Froch. :rofl

 

How can he have fought like a *****, when he hurt Froch and Froch didn't hurt him?

How can he have fought like a ***** when he landed cleaner, better punches than Froch did?


If hurting your opponent more than they hurt you and landing better shots on your opponent than he lands on you makes you a *****, then the greatest boxing technicians of all-time are all "bitches" aren't they???


:nut Your statement makes no sense. Smarten up.

 

And that's why your opinion just stopped counting :good

 

Posts like these are why I love you Popkins...........platonically.

 

michigan warrior, say you give Froch 4 rounds. You said 5 is a stretch. So even if froch got 4 rounds, due to the deduction the score would have been 115-112 to Direll.
Thats still not a one sided beatdown? Thats still a relatively close fight in my book.

For the record i scored it 114-113 Direll. But i can understand if people gave the fight to Froch