How could you score that fight for Froch? Based on what criteria?

[Fantomskillz]

Each judge scores each round using the following criteria:

* Clean Punching
* Effective Aggression
* Ring Generalship
* Defense
Based on the above criteria, how could you give Froch more than a round or two? All the clean punching came from Dirrell. Froch was aggressive but completely ineffective. Dirrell showed ring generalship. He dictated where the fight was fought and fought at his style/pace for 90% of the fight. Defense defintely in Dirrell's favor, as Froch landed very few clean punches on Dirrell.

I don't understand how Froch excelled in any of the aforementioned categories on anyone's scorecard.

[Syf]

we've been over this...

Their case is that Froch was stalking- "pushing the fight", and that the fight was Dirrell's to lose, being in the champ's backyard.

**** is tired. I'm over it

[..WaRSpencE..]

The Crowd was biased as ****..and I believe that swayed the ref and the judges..
there was absolute silence when Dirrell rocked Froch and almost knocked him down.
nobody realized that he almost got layed out until Froch threw his hands up and fell back on the ropes..

Dirrell won..but didn't get the nod..it's all good..he'll be back.

[street bully]

If Froch won the Oscar beat Mayweather.

[Bushidō]

I think Calzaghe won

[George W Bush]

As a judge, you're supposed to score fights based on who you subjectively feel looks scared or terrified, and who complains more, and who clinches more. You also award points on who throws the more menacing looking punches regardless of whether or not they land.

[street bully]

As a judge, you're supposed to score fights based on who you subjectively feel looks scared or terrified, and who complains more, and who clinches more. You also award points on who throws the more menacing looking punches regardless of whether or not they land.

Only in England.

[Pullcounter]

Each judge scores each round using the following criteria:

* Clean Punching
* Effective Aggression
* Ring Generalship
* Defense
Based on the above criteria, how could you give Froch more than a round or two? All the clean punching came from Dirrell. Froch was aggressive but completely ineffective. Dirrell showed ring generalship. He dictated where the fight was fought and fought at his style/pace for 90% of the fight. Defense defintely in Dirrell's favor, as Froch landed very few clean punches on Dirrell.

I don't understand how Froch excelled in any of the aforementioned categories on anyone's scorecard.

cause it was froch's hometown?

[Fantomskillz]

we've been over this...

Their case is that Froch was stalking- "pushing the fight", and that the fight was Dirrell's to lose, being in the champ's backyard.

**** is tired. I'm over it

"Pushing the fight" is not judging criteria. It's called EFFECTIVE aggression. Froch was completely ineffective. You cannot deny that.

[Shadows]

If Froch won the Oscar beat Mayweather.