The difference between Haye and Dirrell.

one got robbed,one didnt (surprisingly) end of.

Ohhhh.. so when you fight a bigger man, you should move. OK. Thanks. I'll remember that. Just based on the fact that you have been here just over a month and have over 4000 posts, i'd say you need to get out more.

Dirrell was actually falling over on purpose to avoid being hit. A disgrace and to award him victory would have been a dark day for boxing. How do you know it was intentional? Maybe the kid was just exhausted, and also very shaken by Froch's dirty tactics? HItting the back of the head... strangling on the ropes, body slamming..hitting on the breaks? ect? And the ref wasn't doing anything to stop it..that had to have been at least somewhat demoralizing for the kid.

why did froch bloody dirrells face after just 4 rounds...why did dirrell legs go in the 8th round hook by froch...comon admit it froch won easily.. Pic of Dirrell's bloody face please. I would be for sure you'd have that in your sig, being who you are, if that was actually true.

Dirrell always fights on the back foot and had to do so against a FASTER and much more skilled opponent then Valuev. say it's about even except, froch's got some power

I know they fought similar fights, but Haye had good reason to hit and run this reason is 7 feet tall and 7 stone heavier than him, it was the tactics needed for a fight like this, and more impressive in the heavyweight division. Dirrell had no reason to fight like this, himself and Froch were the same size, weight and height, give or take a little bit. He had no reason to run like he did. Haye was dwarfed by a giant, Dirrell wasn't. The only difference is that dirrellgot robbed and haye didnt

I wouldn't score a fight based off the size difference between fighters......thats being BIAS towards the smaller man......IMO Haye, Dirrell, and Hopkins fought similiar fights against Valuev, Froch, and Calzaghe......I had Haye, Dirrell and Hopkins winning ALL those fights!!....no differnce.....they all landed the more cleaner affective shots!!......avoiding the incoming while scoring on the move!!:boxing: I had Dirrell and Haye winning, but there is no way Hopkins Calzaghe was a similar fight. Calzaghe outlanded Hopkins and Hopkins gassed badly. I don't know to this day why people think Hopkins won that fight.

the right man won last night, the wrong man did in the froch fight i'm fairly certain dirrell actually landed more on froch than haye did on valuev also did you reincarnate into stevie wonder when you watched the froch dirrell fight are are you that ugly and stupid???please pick a choice...

Valuev is widely regarded as one of the weaker punchers in the HW division, despite his size. Froch however, has pretty good punching power, and definitely had the ability to knock Dirrell out if he caught Dirrell at all, hence Dirrell's tactics. BUT... Dirrell was hitting Froch more and with more cleaner shots than Haye did to Valuev...though I did like Haye's 12th round. The only difference between Haye and Dirrell in those two fights is size, a bit of holding, and most of all nationality c'mon... admit it why did froch bloody dirrells face after just 4 rounds...why did dirrell legs go in the 8th round hook by froch...comon admit it froch won easily..

the right man won last night, the wrong man did in the froch fight i'm fairly certain dirrell actually landed more on froch than haye did on valuev also

no really.....I had Hopkins beating Calzaghe......like many many many many others!!.....there's ALOT of people who share this thought!! I also had Hopkins winning. And for Froch-Dirrell, they will fight again in the future, and he will finish Froch next time. This'll wake all these delusional Froch fans up.

And Froch should have gotten a point deducted for all the hitting to the back of the head and for piledriving Dirrell. dirrell should have been deducted a point for showing the back of his head while trying to give froch a bj... Froch won by 3 rounds that hook froch landed in the 8th got dirrell mad holding..

IMO Haye, Dirrell, and Hopkins fought similiar fights against Valuev, Froch, and Calzaghe......I had Haye, Dirrell and Hopkins winning ALL those fights!!....no differnce.....they all landed the more cleaner affective shots!! BS. There were similarities between Froch/Dirrell and Valuev/Haye, maybe, but it's idiotic to group Calzaghe/Hopkins with them. For a start, Dirrell and Haye both outlanded their opponents while Calzaghe outlanded Hopkins 2-1! The 'cleaner, effective' thing is also BS, as it usually is. In what way were Dirrell's punches 'effective'? They didn't change Froch's gameplan, or aggression, in the slightest throughout the course of the fight. Froch was never seriously hurt and finished the fight looking like he had just got back from a jog in the park.. so how, exactly, are Dirrell's punches supposed to have been 'effective'? In contrast, B-Hop's punching was effective, as was Calzaghe's.. both dictated the fight at different times and forced their opponent to try and adapt. It's no coincidence both Zag and B-Hop are a class above any of the other four fighters we are talking about.

Haye didnt once try to do the viennese

I know they fought similar fights, but Haye had good reason to hit and run this reason is 7 feet tall and 7 stone heavier than him, it was the tactics needed for a fight like this, and more impressive in the heavyweight division. Dirrell had no reason to fight like this, himself and Froch were the same size, weight and height, give or take a little bit. He had no reason to run like he did. Haye was dwarfed by a giant, Dirrell wasn't. We could flip that around and say Dirrell ran from a bigger puncher than himself, Haye did not.

You must be crazy having Hopkins beating Calzaghe. I think you got it the wrong way round! no really.....I had Hopkins beating Calzaghe......like many many many many others!!.....there's ALOT of people who share this thought!!

Neither Haye nor Hopkins fell over on purpose multiple times as a tactic to avoid being hit.

I wouldn't score a fight based off the size difference between fighters......thats being BIAS towards the smaller man......IMO Haye, Dirrell, and Hopkins fought similiar fights against Valuev, Froch, and Calzaghe......I had Haye, Dirrell and Hopkins winning ALL those fights!!....no differnce.....they all landed the more cleaner affective shots!!......avoiding the incoming while scoring on the move!!:boxing:

Dirrell was actually falling over on purpose to avoid being hit. A disgrace and to award him victory would have been a dark day for boxing.

That's an awful excuse and I think you realize that. Just because Haye was faced with a tough opponent in stature does not mean that he needed to fight like that. The man did fight like that because it was the smart thing to do, Valuev is slow. Dirrell was also in his right to fight like that too because Froch is slow. There are not special rules to boxing just because you are fighting a very large man, it's boxing and the rules are pretty cut and dry. Haye deserved to win and so did Dirrell and I think most Brits are finally caught being hypocrites if they believe else wise. To a lot of British fans credit though,even a majority of them believe that Dirrell won, even if it wasn't a style that they appreciated.I think a lot of them (not all) felt as disgraced that Froch should hold the belt,as they were aggitated for Dirrell's style.Then you have the same group of idiots who loathe Kelly Pavlik,yet love Froch...to me they are similar.One dimentional fighters that stand in front of eachother and bang away until a KO is accomplished...is that boxing? lol