froch defo won after re-watching again

To me it looked like Froch was very wary of Dirrells speed. There were several times where he was in position to throw and was very hesitant.

 

After re-watching it today i had Dirrell winning by an extra round more than my original scorecard. Scoring fights is subjective though and there were many close rounds so i suppose that is why we are getting such varying scores.

The reason i had Dirrell winning was because i believe he landed more shots and landed the more cleaner, powerful shots.

Now, i agree with you that Dirrell was ragged at times and like other people have pointed out on here, that despite Dirrells good defensive footwork (or "running" as some like to call it) he didn't counter that often. All to often he had Froch punching thin air like an amatuer but instead of capitalising on this and countering, Dirrell would often move away admiring his own work and pulling tongues at Froch. Now if Froch was hitting him or at least throwing more shots then yes i might have given more rounds to Froch, but the fact of the matter is that Froch was far to tentative himself during the fight and went through long periods of inactivity even when Dirrell was standing right in front of him. e.g. Froch would cut the ring of quite well and he often had Dirrell in a corner or on the ropes but instead of moving his feet quickly and coming in behind the jab he would leap in with a telegraphed winging hook and completely miss.

Now some people may interpret this as Froch trying more or forcing the fight or being the aggressor or what ever other phrase you want to call it, and i suppose in a certain light it could be seen as that. However, i view it as two people in a stand of, feinting and not throwing, then Froch, unable to figure out a way to get to this flashy, quick fighter decides to throw a desperate, amaturish winging hook.

Ultimately though it doesn't really matter what you call it as, for me anyway, i will give the aggressor credit if his aggression is effective and unfortunately the effectiveness of Froch's aggression was few and far between.

My whole feeling of the fight is that neither fighter gave a particularry good performance but Dirrell won because he landed more and landed with more cleaner shots plus he also made Froch look awful quite often throughout the fight.

 

I still havnt seen the full fight but I found this, is it an accurate summary?


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fztqCbOUiTY[/ame]

 

You have to be careful, most of these youtube highlights will likely be biased one way or the other.

The fight probably turned on the first 4 rounds, when next to nothing happened. I've read Americans saying Dirrell won all four; I think the judges would have scored them for Froch.

 

Dirrell needs a trainer who can help him develop an inside game.

 

dirrell fought negative and didn't really try to take the title BUT had he fought positive he would have been more open and he DID NOT want to get hit more.

 

Agreed. They will have to ensure that whenever Dirrell fights it is a doubleheader night.

 

Bet he's looking forward to his next fight then!

 

dirrel faces the same problem v abrahms. he can box his socks off but he'll fight negative. if he fights positive he could be laid out.

 

watching live i thought dirrell by a couple of rounds.

but watch again, especially fighting in the clinch and I gave it to froch at 116-111.


strange fight.

 

Watching live I had it 115-112, watching again on Primetime had it 114-113 both to Froch.

 

yeah i had it 114-113 Froch ugly fight to score. Dirrell lost the fight by not being more active but i can understand either fight being given score of 115-112 the first 4 rounds are awful to score

 

I agree,i thought the very same thing,he had Dirrell cornered many times but just kept pawing with the left hand.I'm convinced he had hand trouble,the straight right and uppercut are Frochs trademark punches he threw neither against Dirrell.

 

I don't think so, Froch has been completely ungracious, I'm sure he'd have mentioned an injury.

 

I don't usually score fights but I was bored last night and looked this up on YT. I scored a few rounds even (I scored them 10-10, not sure if this is correct or if you are supposed to score them 9-9). I ended up with a scoredcard reading 115-115. Watching live without scoring I felt Froch just edged it.

Agree with the earlier posts that Froch was very wary to lead off at times for fear of being countered.