I had it 7 rounds to 5 to Dirrell. I thought there was an argument either way in a few rounds though and I'm not really surprised that Dirrells holding every time Froch connected didn't impress the judges. I think it was the holding rather than running that cost him the fight, there's nothing wrong with being elusive and fighting of the back foot but his holding spoiled the fight and probably cost him some rounds. I've seen far worse decisions even though I had Dirrell winning, Strum-Ghevor springs to mind as a recent one.
Oh you must mean the majority of judges, the majority of press row, Danish TV...who all scored it for Froch You've been sucked in by bias commentary my friend. Watch again with volume turned off.
I also had Froch winning. Dirrell's defence where he put his head in Carl's crotch was infuriating and then he complained he was getting hit in the back of the head. He ran, held, and then fell to the canvas when in danger of getting trapped. I don't understand why Dirrell had to turn it into that kind of fight as he has the skill to beat Froch cleanly provided he doesn't get caught with something big. He obviously thought it wasn't worth the risk and turned the fight into a farce. Definitely not a championship winning performance.
I'd say thats about the percentage of Brits on the forum, with 75% being AMERICAN! = Bias from both sides every time a Brit and an American fight. Although there will be brits who thought Froch lost of course! The fact is that Dirrell was hugging for his life in the middle rounds. He made Froch look amateurish with his wild misses, and he made HIMSELF look amateurish with his hugging and whining to the ref. Froch won the fight, but both guys reputations suffered IMO
Yep, huge, to the point where I stopped scoring it. I knew the judges wouldn't have similar cards though, and I wasn't surprised that the decision was split given how messy the fight was.
Wrong Ricardo...I prefer dirrell's over froch's style wise and I'm a "yank" and froch won on my card....
True, i had it 8-4 Dirrell. 7-5 i can maybe understand. Froch maybe had 2 meaningful punches land throughout the entire fight. Bull**** call.
Im not saying that everyone scores a fight depending on what country you come from. But there is bias from a lot of people. For example Doug Fischer ( a journalist who i have a lot of respect for and enjoy readin) recently said that Taylor has equal power to Abraham atsch I see that you have Malinaggi in your avatar, your a fan of pure boxing obviously. Malinaggi, Floyd etc Dirrell is normally a boxer but i wouldnt call what he did last nigth a style. It was just plain ugly, the guy neglected his jab, his best weapon! For rounds at a time.
Come on man, you have a lot of credibility on these forums, but i dont know how it is possible for you to have Dirrell by such a wide margin.
Well what happened was this: I scored the fight based upon my understanding of the rules of boxing and came out with a very wide scorecard for Dirrell. I thought his defence should have been scored as more affective than Carl's aggression and I thought that his punching was more affective.
Whilst talking about Dirrells defensive mastery? british broadcasters always seem to be agaisnt their fighters, a prime example being the Calzaghe - Hopkins fight. Duke Mckenzie was telling anyone who would listen that he felt Hopkins won.