What you need to do is go and watch Abril-Rios and see the difference between a fight that could've went either way and a robbery. I wanted Bernard to win but if you don't do enough on your own turf to make it clear then you can have no complaints. Man,this General is really getting worse by the day.I really hope it can pick up from this particularly bad spell.
B-Hop-Joe was the correct decision. Joe was outlanding and outhrowing Bernard throughout. Froch literally hit Dirrell in the face less than 5 times cleanly. Dirrell acted like a *****, but he clearly won the fight
I don't even like Calslappy and he quite decisively beat Hopkins. But Hopkins turned that fight into a race battle and there's apparently some bitter fans on this board who can't accept that he "lost to a white boy" despite pulling out every cheap dirty trick in his arsenal to do otherwise. How can you be such insecure little racists?
Neither were robberies. One was an awful fight that was close but the right decision. The other was an awful fight that was close and the wrong decision. What is an undeniable fact is Hopkins and Dirrel are a disgrace. If they fought each other it would be a whinefest.
The right guy won both times The ineffective aggressor won in both fights because the other guy just didnt fight Froch may have done terrible with his offense but at least he had an offense. Dirrel literally gave away the fight vs a guy who he proved he could outbox boxing is scored by individual rounds, Dirrel had 1 or 2 big rounds that make some people think he won but he essentially did very little the rest of the fight It was a strange fight where Dirrel showed he could win but just didnt, might have won an immediate rematch though Calzaghe beat Hopkins in similar fashion to how Oscar got by Whitaker, Calzaghe was busy and ineffective but Hopkins faded stopped punching and just lost because he couldnt fight 12 rounds Not the best victories or the prettiest but I cant reward a guy who does nothing for 12 rounds
