Dirrell was robbed in UK - Kotelnik robbed in USA

I seem to remember Hearns landing a bomb on his dome that cracked the Panama canal. :hey

True. Ray did the same with Hearns. Got his lucky victory and road off into the sunset.

 

You lied in saying that a couple boxing mags had the fight for Froch. Yet when pressed cant provide a source. How is that not lying?

 

Its not a lie to say Boxing News and The Ring scored for Froch over Dirrell. Your lying by saying its not true. I dont have to provide a source for it. Can you find a source to disprove it? Of course not because they scored for Froch. Pwned again

 

Very true, Hearns did knock Durans out............ towards the end of his career. ****, Hearns knocked him out in 84, Im sure Duran started boxing late 60s. thats nearly 20 years after his pro debut!!! Against a near prime Hearns AT MIDDLEWEIGHT. The guy started at 119 and dominated the lightweight division for years.

 

Dirrell was never robbed in the Froch fight. It was close and could have gone either way. If he tried boxing instead of running/holding/acting the **** he may have stood more chance

 

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2009/10/abraham-and-froch-the-king-and-the-cobra-come-up-trumps/

"The fight was close. I don’t think that there would be major complaints or upheaval if either got the nod. I think Froch did probably deserve the decision."

 

Haye put on a clinic. He landed at a 68% success rate, which is complety unheard of in a 12 round title fight. It wouldn't suprise me if that was the highest percentage for a title fight. He outlanded Valuev by 3 to 2 and barely took any punches.

Haye's performance was MUCH better. He won the fight decisively, as Valuev acknowledged.

And besides, I said "no inury". Haye broke his hand and that was the reason he threw so little, especially his right hand, yet he still clearly outboxed Valuev and did so without holding, running and crying. He boxed brilliantly.

So you need another example.

 

I'm not trying to spoil your party defending that running ***** but I actualy have both The Ring and Boxing News from that moment, and Bailey was right, they both have it for Froch. I'm not saying I buy the scoring blindly but one has to be dull to say the Dirrell outclassed Froch the entire fight or vice versa... It's true that many people wear subjective glasses when looking to a fight, but I'm not a big fan of either man, I watched the fight many times and I have to go with what many (unbiased) people said about the fight. It was VERY close and could've gone either but Froch got the decision although razor thin but it could also went to Dirrell, just suck it up...

 

Try counting the holding and hitting ,and the shots to the back of the head. Amazing how people view things when u have a certain bias.

 

That's the problem of biased fans. For every clean punch their favorite fighter land, they have to foul 20 times before they even (are willing to) notice they are fouling...

 

Thankyou for mentioning Keueng. What Mitchiganwarior cant seem to understand is that I wasnt going to go to any effort to prove it true because I like you had read it with my own eyes and didnt have to prove it true. Someone also said that Boxing Monthly had Froch a winner also, but I havent seen that myself, maybe you know the answer?

Mitchiganwarrior Pwned again

 

I just posted a link proving boxing news said it!

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2009/10/abraham-and-froch-the-king-and-the-cobra-come-up-trumps/

 

Yeah, the big magazines gave it to Froch.

I also think it's funny that Michigan"Warrior" keeps repeating what Dirrell did was good boxing. He's acting like it was prime Pep in there. It was a close fight against a 'slow, neanderthal'. If it was such a good performance, I think Dirrell may have just made it a bit clearer than it was.

 

Froch outlanded Dirrell also

 

Not on MichiganWarrior's ever-changing personal punch stats.

The latest update is that Froch landed minus two punches and Dirrell landed so many punches that it is beyond the current capability of science to state the number.