Question For Those Who Think Dirrell Is 'Greatly Skilled' Or 'The Future S6 Winner'

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Clegg
    Banned
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Mar 2008
    • 24674
    • 3,726
    • 2,307
    • 233,274

    #1

    Question For Those Who Think Dirrell Is 'Greatly Skilled' Or 'The Future S6 Winner'

    Ok, so Froch was terrible. But Dirrell, this supposed 'great technical' landed about 10 punches a round for most of the fight. For 2 minutes of every round, he ran away. He was literally running at speed.

    Yes, he was on the wrong end of a bad decision tonight, but that doesn't translate into him being able to beat an elite boxer.

    You guys are acting as if he is James Toney, fighting in the pocket and yet still avoiding 99% of his opponent's shots while landing 99% of his own. That's skill. That's masterful. This to me wasn't much more impressive than the Curtis Stevens fight.

    Let's look at it this way: If Margarito had tried to outbox Paul Williams by mostly standing still and flicking out a jab, and Williams had responded by landing 4 punches around and then running away, until trapped at which point he would hold and look to the ref with a pained expression on his face, would that be masterful? Because that's what we're talking about here.

    Dawson is far better than this guy. Ward is better than this guy. Watch Kessler-Andrade, where Kessler shows 1000x more composure than Dirrell against a more aggressive, physically stronger opponent, and lands 100s of hard, technically perfect punches while taking hardly anything back in return.

    Please, do you really think that Chad Dawson would only land a couple of punches on Froch? Even Tarver-Woods was 10x the display of skill that we saw tonight.

    You can't have it both ways. If Froch was terrible (and he was) then landing such a low number of punches on him doesn't take masterful skills.

    Dirrell is talented, but he hasn't shown great skills and fought like a scared child. As soon as someone decent (Abraham, Kessler) starts to open up against him, he will go into meltdown and be knocked out. He doesn't have the mentality to win this thing, he hasn't displayed the skill to win this thing, and you guys are ridiculously overrating him just because he landed a low number of punches on a guy you consider to be ****.

    So my question is...how exactly do you have him winning this, and what exactly were these great skills? Do you really think he's on the same level as the guys mentioned above?
  • !! Shawn
    !! Shown
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Dec 2007
    • 9810
    • 670
    • 724
    • 31,455

    #2
    Originally posted by Clegg
    Ok, so Froch was terrible. But Dirrell, this supposed 'great technical' landed about 10 punches a round for most of the fight. For 2 minutes of every round, he ran away. He was literally running at speed.

    Yes, he was on the wrong end of a bad decision tonight, but that doesn't translate into him being able to beat an elite boxer.

    You guys are acting as if he is James Toney, fighting in the pocket and yet still avoiding 99% of his opponent's shots while landing 99% of his own. That's skill. That's masterful. This to me wasn't much more impressive than the Curtis Stevens fight.

    Let's look at it this way: If Margarito had tried to outbox Paul Williams by mostly standing still and flicking out a jab, and Williams had responded by landing 4 punches around and then running away, until trapped at which point he would hold and look to the ref with a pained expression on his face, would that be masterful? Because that's what we're talking about here.

    Dawson is far better than this guy. Ward is better than this guy. Watch Kessler-Andrade, where Kessler shows 1000x more composure than Dirrell against a more aggressive, physically stronger opponent, and lands 100s of hard, technically perfect punches while taking hardly anything back in return.

    Please, do you really think that Chad Dawson would only land a couple of punches on Froch? Even Tarver-Woods was 10x the display of skill that we saw tonight.

    You can't have it both ways. If Froch was terrible (and he was) then landing such a low number of punches on him doesn't take masterful skills.

    Dirrell is talented, but he hasn't shown great skills and fought like a scared child. As soon as someone decent (Abraham, Kessler) starts to open up against him, he will go into meltdown and be knocked out. He doesn't have the mentality to win this thing, he hasn't displayed the skill to win this thing, and you guys are ridiculously overrating him just because he landed a low number of punches on a guy you consider to be ****.
    How is that any different than Floyd Mayweather? All we saw was like I said before the fight, Dirrell is willing to stink out the arena when he has to.

    Comment

    • Clegg
      Banned
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Mar 2008
      • 24674
      • 3,726
      • 2,307
      • 233,274

      #3
      Originally posted by !! Shawn
      How is that any different than Floyd Mayweather? All we saw was like I said before the fight, Dirrell is willing to stink out the arena when he has to.
      Floyd has opened up plenty of times. That's changed as he's moved up in weight, but even since then he's shown the ability to fight in the trenches and still show a lot of skill. What Mayweather did to Hatton was far better than what Dirrell did to Froch.

      Comment

      • George W Bush
        Banned
        Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
        • Sep 2009
        • 316
        • 19
        • 0
        • 411

        #4
        Originally posted by Clegg
        Ok, so Froch was terrible. But Dirrell, this supposed 'great technical' landed about 10 punches a round for most of the fight. For 2 minutes of every round, he ran away. He was literally running at speed.
        That only works for FMJ.

        Comment

        • Dynamite Kid
          Slicker than your average
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Feb 2007
          • 20701
          • 627
          • 209
          • 38,291

          #5
          I tried to tell people this before, Dirrell is talented but he has never greatly impressed me and ive been watching him for a while, he cant fight inside for ****, he is exclusively a long rang fighter.

          Comment

          • Crazylegs77
            null and void
            Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
            • Jan 2008
            • 13101
            • 445
            • 296
            • 21,573

            #6
            Originally posted by !! Shawn
            How is that any different than Floyd Mayweather? All we saw was like I said before the fight, Dirrell is willing to stink out the arena when he has to.
            Floyd is like a mexican warrior compared to Dirrell.

            Comment

            • Shadows
              All-Time Great
              Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
              • Jul 2009
              • 8293
              • 192
              • 250
              • 15,434

              #7
              I never thought he would win the Super Six, and tonight didn't change my opinion. He'd get chin checked by Kessler or Abraham, and lose a decision to Ward.
              Last edited by Shadows; 10-17-2009, 11:13 PM.

              Comment

              • !! Shawn
                !! Shown
                Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                • Dec 2007
                • 9810
                • 670
                • 724
                • 31,455

                #8
                Originally posted by Clegg
                Floyd has opened up plenty of times. That's changed as he's moved up in weight, but even since then he's shown the ability to fight in the trenches and still show a lot of skill. What Mayweather did to Hatton was far better than what Dirrell did to Froch.
                You mean like he did against Baldomir? Get the **** out of here clown.

                Great, compare Floyd vs Hatton, when Froch clearly had 20lb on Dirrell in the ring.

                Comment

                • Bhopreign
                  Banned
                  • Jun 2006
                  • 11273
                  • 419
                  • 100
                  • 12,036

                  #9
                  Ive always said Dirrell has flaws and I dont consider him really slick, he's more fast than anything.

                  Comment

                  • Toney Loc
                    Banned
                    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                    • May 2009
                    • 12092
                    • 597
                    • 1,190
                    • 14,860

                    #10
                    Dirrell is GREEN, gentlemen. He was able to beat Froch because Froch sucks. That is all.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    TOP