Froch vs Dirrell controversy thread

You sound like an MMA fan who dont know anything about boxing

This is the sweet science, once you understand that 1st and foremost then you will understand that what you saw as running was actually strategy and for someone who was supposed to be running then how comes the runner almost knocked out the other guy in the championship rounds when most of you illiterate Froch Nuthuggers predicted that Dirrell would be the one fading and getting knocked out

IN THOSE ROUNDS

For a fighter who has never fought 12 rounds he almost knocked out the guy who also predicted that he would be the one to dominate in the championship rounds so my question to you would be, what type of a champion is Froch because from where im standing not a very good one.

He was made to look like a clumsy flat footed bafoon with no co-ordination or rhythm who had to resort to hitting behind the head constantly and throwing his opponent down out of frustration due to his inability to actually box

 

I originally had Dirrell winning the fight by some margin but having rewatched the fight it was a lot closer than I had initially thought. I still had Dirrell winning by a round but it was a very close fight. My initially scoring was marred by how god damn awful Froch looks when he fights, he's slow and ungainly but he is also deceptively effective in his own awkward way.

Dirrel was flashier and looked like he could dominate had he raised his intensity but he never did. On the other hand Froch fought his heart out he had to push himself and resorted to rough house tatics to turn the fight his way. I guess the guy who wanted it more got the decision. The combination of Dirrell fighting within himself and Froch's intensity which I mistook for desparation effected my original analysis of the fight.

10-9 Dirrell (close round though)
9-10 Froch
9-10 Froch
10-9 Dirrell
9-10 Froch
10-9 Dirrell
9-10 Froch
9-10 Froch
10-9 Dirrell
9-9 (Dirrells round but for the point deduction)
10-9 Dirrell
10-9 Direll (close round again)

114-113 Dirrell

 

Same here. I wanted Froch to win but he simply didn't win legitimately.

When Ali danced to make Sunny Liston miss, it was called footwork. Now it is called running and automatically makes you lose a fight. Ali clinched around 100 times each time he fought Frazier and Norton. Boxing fans salivate when those fights are mentioned.

If the emphasis is not on clean, effective punhcing but rather on macho bravado, it isn't boxing anymore.

 

i just watched it again and i had it for Dirrell by at least 1 round. Froch was clumsy and skills of dirrell were great!

sorry froch fans i am impartial and no interest in either fighters but i scored it IMO for dirrell

 

Completely agree with his assessment of the Froch-Direll fight, it's a fact that Direll outlanded Froch, as well as avoiding most of his punches, but at the end of the day; one man pressed the fight, the other avoided it; who's the true champion?

 

This people is a typical reply from a football hooligan who spends most of his time starting fights outside pubs and ends up getting himself knocked the **** out by the locals inside

 

Most of the fans there were not ringside. They were far from the action and not really able to tell what really landed. As for the general action in the ring, I think you're right. It must have looked even worse live.

 

I've seen that guy om YouTube, he's good.

 

Well let see. Here are the 4 criteria to score a fight and who I think did better in those departments.

Clean punching - Dirrell landed the harder punches
Effective aggressiveness - Froch hit nothing but air for the most part. Dirrell landed more punches.
Ring Generalship - Dirrell wins this by a mile. Froch was flat footed and couldn't cut the ring.
Defense - Dirrell was elusive...Froch blocked punches with his face.

What now?

 

From someone who wanted Froch to win:

Stumbling forward face first with arms spread out like a windmill isn't scoring points in boxing. Effective aggression has the little word "effective" in it and comes after clean punching in how a fight is scored.

I didn't like Dirrell's performance either, sometimes a fight may not deserve a winner. But to say that Froch clearly won means to emphasize just moving forward and nothing else.

 

Then you're a stronger man than me. An absolutely awful fight, regardless of who you think won. I'd rather watch paint dry than lose another 36 minutes of my life watching it again...

 

Froch likes to claim he's better than Calzaghe right? Well Calzaghe had the same middle - of - the - night deal against Lacy and delivered one of the best fights of his career. A professional athlete can adjust his body clock. Froch didn't lack stamina against Dirrell, he just doesn't have skills.

 

Personally I don't support fighters based on where they're from. Their fighting style, skill, and personality are far more important.

 

Christ. Its got the point where the same people are just re-posting the same stuff. ****ing pointless.

 

Dirrel was beaten convincingly, he landed 2 flush shots all fight, never hurt Froch, ran, clinched, slid, ducked, fell, cried and moaned.

Froch out jabbed him, was aggressive, landed nearly treble the power shots on Dirrell, marked his face up, left him bloody, nearly Ko'ed him and left with his belt.

Clearly you don't winboxing matches by showing fear and running.

It's not like Dirrell did a Mayweather, ran and hit, Dirrell just ran, unable to counter, and too scared to throw shots.

He should be kicked off the super 6 for giving UFC fans more ammo to suggest boxing is boring.