Froch still says he is ?unbeaten"

He didn't clearly beat him. Only delusional blind people would think so.

 

Kessler won that fight, it was close but the right guy won.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Froch should let it go. This **** wont bring him new fans. Instead he should just seek out a rematch in Nottingham. The fact that he isnt pressing for revenge tells you that he'd rather not face Kessler again.

Froch usually says a lot of funny stuff, but this is trash. He lost a close fight. He boxed better than he ever did and he was in a great fight. Move on.

 

I mean, instead of trying to toss the guy he could have atleast smartly roughed him up. Something like Hatton would do(and get away with) at home. Or Ward, actually. Could have used his head a little bit, banged away at dude's body in short punches, maneuver himself into a position where Dirrell was illegally holding him... He fouled angry, not smart.

 

I guess the Kessler decision made up for the Dirrell decision in which he should have lost .

 

I don't think he means it in the way a lot of people seem to think he means it. I believe he means that he still has his pride and nothing was taken from him after that lose because it was a good fight, and he is fully aware of what he did wrong, so he isn't beating himself up about it... But you guys go ahead and twist his words and make things up.

 

I think Froch feels his fight with Kessler was not a fight where he represented himself 100%. It may be BS but he said his plans were thrown out and preparation was not ideal to say the least ............ he wasn't focussed.

It's not the most controversial thing a Boxer has said and I think he genuinely believes he let himself down against Kessler.

Hopefully he remedies this by winning the S6, and if he does, then I most probably will accept that he wasn't right for Kessler, it is possible.

 

For what it's worth I had Dirrell & Kessler winning those fights, FRoch is just a sore loser. Good fighter, but a ****-poor loser.

 

Don't divide by zero (a-b=0) you "son of a *****"!:angel Division by zero is a Froch patent:deal

 

:rofl wtf

 

I gotta watch Kessler-Froch again. I hate Froch, thought he lost to Dirrel, but I thought he won the Kessler fight. This is a point of view that only Froch nutthuggers are supposed to have, so I gotta rewatch this fight. Man I hate Froch...

 

Froch has a case that he won the Kessler fight, he does't have a case for winning the Dirrell fight. Dirrell was the only one landing clean effective punches in that fight. People say Dirrell was negative, so what, why would he stand there and give Carl Froch an avenue into the fight cause he doesn't have the skills to compete when you dont engage him? bottom line, whether your doing it going away, or coming foward, when one guy is consistently get hit in the face, whilst not being able to get off himself, he doesn't win the round based on willing, direction of motion. Froch's main success against Dirrell, was rabbit punching him in the clinches, and the fact Dirrell had a point taken.

Anyone who scored the Dirrell fight for Froch, seemingly doesn't score punches that actually land.

All that said, I actually do think Froch might of got the benefit of the doubt against Kessler.