Another Froch-Dirrell thread

I just saw & scored the fight, and this is my interpretation. I scored it 115-113 Dirrell (including the point deduction). I gave the sixth, seventh, eighth & twelfth rounds to Froch, including a tie in the ninth. The rest went to Dirrell. I think the best case scenario for Froch is a tie, including the point deduction. I think the point deduction was fair, and will explain why.

In the post-fight interview, Froch explained that he had to hit Dirrell with rabbit punches because that was all Dirrell was giving him -- he was ducking low and staying there. He explained that if he just sat there and waited for him to come up, he'd take too much time and then come up with a great left hook, which is what he did. Therefore, the punches by Froch are fair. I agree with this completely and simply cannot see how anyone could disagree.

Regarding the point deduction. Dirrell fought scared from the first round. He ran, tried to keep as much distance as possible and only engaged briefly in quick spurts and then retreated. He even missed opportunties to hit Froch when they were close so he could instead disengage and escape. This is not the behavior of a champion! Dirrell's body-language was telling: the man was intimidated by Froch. Froch never showed that fear, he looked assertive and aggressive the whole fight. This is an insight into the psychology of the fighters. A champion should not lose a fight by decision because the challenger ran and clinched the whole ****ing fight! Froch didn't force the rabbit punches, he had no other choice. Dirrell deserved to lose the point for making a stinker of a championship fight. Let me add that I believe Dirrell could have won had he not fought scared, though the chances that he gets KO'd go up as well.

I thought Dirrell won, but it was an awkward fight and Dirrell did not fight like a champion. My trainer, who trained James Toney at one point along with other former champs, and who will go unnamed, thought Dirrell ran like a coward. To my surprise (my gym is very black), that was the consensus. I didn't hear anyone support Dirrell. Those who gave the fight to Froch seem to support their decision by the idea that to beat the champion, you have to BEAT him. If Dirrell does not run (which is not the behavior of a champ) and does not excessively clinch, Froch makes it a close fight and possible KO's him. This is why some refuse to accept Dirrell as winning the fight. I think he still wins the decision, but he is no champion. I think it is ridiculous that so many were outraged by the decision. I disagree with it, but I see why they gave it to Froch. Round-by-round, it was a competitive fight, if not close.

It went home with me when I got gun shy in sparring recently and my trainer said I was "running like Dirrell." Haha Toopretty better stay the **** out of my thread.

 

Which rounds to who?

 

See, that is my primary concern. It was actually a quite close fight if you looked closely. What kills it is that I think the clinching and running by Dirrell was counter-intuitive -- if he had been more aggressive I think he has a decent chance to KO Froch or at least runs away with a proper decision. Froch fought like a champ and kept the title, even if he's an ugly fighter.

Froch made an excellent point at the end when he said that Dirrell wouldn't stand and fight him like a man, so he took what was there (and threw rabbit punches). Disgraceful fight.