right 3 and 4,froch,wasting my time here,anyone,i mean anyone who compares these 2 fights in any way apart from there being 2 blokes boxing,needs to go and watch another sport.i be back
Neither did Froch!! So you just give them to Froch because Dirrell didn't land much? If that's the case you have to give Valuev all the rounds where Haye didn't do much.
Haye's on The One Show right now, haha he's a genuinely funny fella, I think he's great. "I hit him with a knockout shot, damaged my hand, and he didn't even flinch" Interviewer: "What did he do?" "He licked his lips"
ok patrick,im gonna giv dirrel round 5,just becouse it missed 2 mins of it on vid,6 and 7 to froch,he landed more shots and dirrel not once in all 7 rounds has had froch backing up,he has ran and grabed,and fallen over,and froc has landed more,pls watch the fight again. your above statement is a bit silly really,becouse haye did more that valuev in most rounds,even backing the 7 stone bigger man up,completly differant fight
I like Ricky, but can genuinely see how he splits people down the 'miggle'. With David, it's unrehearsed natural charisma.
Ok Widdy, you don't know how to score a fight! You don't lose a round for running, falling or clinching!! If you have done the better work in that round, you win that round! When was Haye backing Valuev up apart from the 12th? And since when has size of opponent been one of the factors you consider when scoring a fight? Are you trying to say that Dirrell did not do enough to win but Haye did?
can't be arsed going back and 4th,we will agree to differ:hey,unless you wanna argue,then we can arm wrestle:bart