P4P Top 10??

I dunno Flea, I consider getting actually outworked and pressued by Hopkins at this stage to be fairly embarrassing. It's not happened to anyone else recently except Roy Jones who is a corpse. Getting outmaneovred, out-thought, okay I can see that...but his stamina was laughable.

 

Yeah, I'm torn on Wladimir if I'm being honest.

 

How is it not fair exactly Flea?

Did Andre Dirrell land the cleaner, more effective punches over the course of the fight or did he not? Because from my point of view it's unarguable that he did. Amateurish or not, he landed, Froch didn't, and that's what wins you fights.

The method in which he does it, while being undesirable, is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Unless you took it upon yourself to deduct points for this "bitchlike" showing the what's the problem exactly?

You may not approve of the way he went about his work, but that doesn't eradicate the fact that he deserved the win. I didn't appreciate the way Haye went about fighting SNV, and while I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility to give the fight to Valuev, Haye still won in my eyes.

 

It's the fact that Dirrell was even less effective and didn't want to fight. The fact Carl was making him run around the ring gave the impression that Carl was bossing, when really both were utterly useless in the first six rounds.

But, Dirrell WAS effective in the second half when he actually fought with Carl. He was faster, sharper and looked the harder puncher at points.

I had Dirrell ahead by a point, even with the deduction. I thought it could have been a draw, but I'm not giving Dirrell credit for that. It was a rotten performance for a title challenge. Yes, Carl was gack but at least he came to do his job (albeit in fairly rubbish fashion).

 

Oh, his stamina is terrible. B-Hop still 'outmanouvered' Pascal with his hustling IMO. Sneaker head here, create space here, body shot here, smother here, working just enough. Pascal is just a pretty stupid fighter, that cannot be denied.

What cannot be denied as well, is that this stupid fighter beat a guy a lot of people had in their top 10 P4P lists, and who was the recognised man at 175. So, despite him being shoddy all round, he was a decent fighter.

And a decent fighter, is a decent win. I'm not saying Pascal was great, but an on form B-Hop will still pretty much beat most guys doing whatever the **** he wants, he's rounded and experienced.

I imagine he looked at Pascal and said 'that's what I'll do'. Because standing off and boxing him didn't really work for Dawson who got caught with looping shots, backed up, and outworked. Although, Dawson always seems to do a lot more standing off than boxing ;-)

As I say, no more than a decent win. Certainly better than Wards win over Green.

Anyway, this is ****ing irrelevant: I don't rate this towards Frochys current P4P standing All I'm saying is, not a great win, not a **** win, but a decent victory and a good performance from Froch :thumbsup

 

I'll go along with that.

 

Okay lets factor it in. Froch's victory according to scorecards, fans and pundits was more infatic.

 

not fair in saying he 'fell down a bit' or whatnot, he was excrutiatingly negative :good

Do I think Dirrell won that fight? Yes, he landed the cleaner punches and Froch barely did anything effective (on 2nd viewing :good).

He won on points under the scoring criteria. I'll give him that. You know what I mean anyway, it's not a 'good way to fight'.

I'm typing one handed, on the blower, and smoking a j' :good you know where i'm comin' from, and i'm not disputing the 'facts'.

i don't think it's that much of a slight on froch in the long run.

 

On Haye-Valuev, I scored it a draw IIRC.

And yes, I totally disagree with that way of 'winning'. Just my opinion, but it's a poor show IMO. I prefer constant holding to constant evading. Slipping, moving out of the way of shots is great!

Moving so much you're rarely in range for your opponent to even throw a shot is not. I love guys who can use lateral movement to potent effect, but there's a new wave of fighters that appear to fight like hitches, knowing that, technically they can win a decision.

It's crap, 'safe' fighting and whether Dirrell won or not, he got very little credit in my eyes.

BUT I DON'T GIVE FROCH ANY CREDIT EITHER, just toclear that up.

As far as I'm concerned it was an NC :deal

 

You're a mong.

 

Then what point are you trying to argue exactly Flea? You won't find me saying that Dirrell gave a Whitaker-like display and was the epitome of what every boxing purist wishes to see.

I merely stated that he deserved to win, due to the fact he landed and Froch didn't, and just because he did it in abundantly less than stellar fashion doesn't eradicate that.

I don't consider anything to be untoward with that statement, you seem to think I enjoyed Dirrell's display in some way. I didn't. Not one iota. But I can still appreciate the fact that he should've been awarded the decision, which is what makes people who chastise Ward for supposed "home-cooking" appear all the more ignorant.

 

No, not even that. I agree with pretty much everything you said.

Only thing I thought was that you downplayed his mugging a bit, that's all.

Wallet, on the night, I was going with what I was seeing. I'm sorry, but one clean punch a round and **** all else ISN'T enough to beat a guy who's reallin trying IMO. Otherwise, fighters would just land the first jab and run for the rest of the round.

Hayes performance in that fight, was another good example of over negativity. I don't agree with it at all. And I stand by it, on the night, there were a lot of rounds where Haye was doing **** all. I was giving it to Valuev on effort.

Of course, on purely clean punching, Haye won. But as I say, those who really try to exploit that will not get mucch kudos from me, it's very much something I'm against, as a viewer, and as someone who likes to see the guys perceived as the best not be participating in 'gloved fencing'.