Another Froch-Dirrell thread

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by spittle8, Oct 24, 2009.


Page 2 of 2
  1. Detroit

    Detroit Get Money Full Member

    2,655
    0
    Nov 7, 2008
    Sooo...if a fighter doesn't stand and trade with his opponent..that means he isn't fighting like a "champion"? Nevermind the fact that your beat chance to win the fight.... is to out-box your opponent. And is best chance to win.... is to get you to fight his fight and stand and trade so he can catch you with something big and KO you...fuc outta here!!!
     
    Detroit, Oct 25, 2009
    Detroit, Oct 25, 2009
    #16
  2. mstar

    mstar Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,943
    318
    Jun 5, 2005
    seems a lot of british fans are flooding on here and scoring fights based on home advantage (e.g shots froch was missing with strangely the crowd thinks connects some how??) i viewed the fight 3 times now with no volume and i had it for dirrell. I did one score for the agressor (frotch) and other for the clean scoring shots i had in both scores i had dirrell winning by SD.

    Froch KNOWS he was found out for just a 1 dimensional slugger with no plan B, or ring smarts to adapt to the opponent. He is getting found out at the high elite level just like Hatton was.
     
    mstar, Oct 25, 2009
    mstar, Oct 25, 2009
    #17
  3. Medicine

    Medicine Boxing Addict banned

    4,277
    4
    Dec 6, 2008
    It seems to be the case that boxing rules say if you fight Froch you have to go toe to toe and slug it out with him, if you fight another way then you are a runner/coward and automatically lose.

    Why on earth would anybody expect Dirrell to slug it out with Froch. Froch hits harder and is bigger.....why would Dirrell want to fight at Froch's advantage and lose?

    Dirrell outboxed Froch and showed how unskillful Froch really is. It was a lame performance by Dirrell........but an absolutely Terrible performance by Froch.
     
    Medicine, Oct 25, 2009
    Medicine, Oct 25, 2009
    #18
  4. spittle8

    spittle8 Dropping Fisticuffs Full Member

    1,046
    4
    Dec 13, 2008
    That's because Dirrell refused to engage, while Froch would get caught coming in or stunned with a flash-in-the-pan. If Froch had succeeded in pissing Dirrell off and got into a real fight, things could have been different. I can see it going either way as far as a KO goes.

    Froch pressed the fight and continually tried to get close, but every time he did, Dirrell clinched and bent over away from Froch's power, refusing to engage. Yes, he won the fight, but it was a championship fight and there should be no room in boxing for that kind of cowardly BS. I also tend to agree IRT scoring, as I gave the fight to Dirrell regardless. I think he should have been punished by a sanctioning body, or the ref should have more seriously penalized Dirrell for fighting that way.

    Dirrell was bent over at an extreme angle which his stomach and sides below Froch's power threshold. He would have had little effect had he tried to get the body, and would have needed to bend himself to do so. In so doing, he would have been exposed to a big hook from Dirrell, which Froch mentioned as convincing him to just rabbit punch. The ref should have penalized Dirrell earlier for those tactics and threatened to DQ him if he didn't stop.

    There's a big difference between boxing a guy and fighting scared. I already explained my reasonings, so unless you're going to address something specific then you're just talking ****.
     
    spittle8, Oct 25, 2009
    spittle8, Oct 25, 2009
    #19
  5. kwyjibo

    kwyjibo O RLY? banned Full Member

    1,194
    0
    Oct 15, 2009
    So did I. I think it's due to personal preference (Dirrell's weird tactics give you reason to score for his opponent).
     
    kwyjibo, Oct 25, 2009
    kwyjibo, Oct 25, 2009
    #20
Page 2 of 2