an answer to a question people think i was avoiding.....

[slimshandy69]

Alot of people on here think because im winning all these debates im avoiding one important question and this questiuon is..." if it s a split decision in your home country it means you have basically lost"

Firsly britain has a great repoutation of fair judging, in nottingham england americas timothy bradley won by split decision against junior witter...


But i put the question back at you...froch going into the 12th had a split decision against taylor, in taylors favour..yes one judge had froch winning. The fight was in taylors backyard..

So do you not agree that by that logic froch was beating taylor going into the 12th round???purely on the basis it was a split decision in taylors backyard...

[Pullcounter]

Alot of people on here think because im winning all these debates im avoiding one important question and this questiuon is..." if it s a split decision in your home country it means you have basically lost"

Firsly britain has a great repoutation of fair judging, in nottingham england americas timothy bradley won by split decision against junior witter...


But i put the question back at you...froch going into the 12th had a split decision against taylor, in taylors favour..yes one judge had froch winning. The fight was in taylors backyard..

So do you not agree that by that logic froch was beating taylor going into the 12th round???purely on the basis it was a split decision in taylors backyard...

bwahahahahha!!! you ain't winning no debates. you're just a persistent bastard.

1) dirrell got robbed in an ugly messy fight... its academic

2) bradley beat up witter and still only got a split

3) you can't apply that paradigm on froch/taylor... taylor scored a knock down although froch was coming on stronger as taylor began to fade. essentiallly that fight is much more complex than that simplistic formula. but in the end, it didn't matter cause froch stopped taylor.

finally, to reiterate the point.... dirrell got robbed in rottingham.

[dans]

But i put the question back at you...froch going into the 12th had a split decision against taylor, in taylors favour..yes one judge had froch winning. The fight was in taylors backyard..

So do you not agree that by that logic froch was beating taylor going into the 12th round???purely on the basis it was a split decision in taylors backyard...

Connecticut is not Taylor's backyard. It was his first time fighting there and traditionally Brit fighters have no problem getting a fair shake in the Northeast (see Calzaghe vs. Roy). Nottingham is Froch's hometown, Connecticut is nearly 1,400 miles from Little Rock. That's the equivelent of Froch fighting in Greece, and a twice the distance than if Froch fought in Germany.

I know you're going to say "but it was in America".

[slimshandy69]

bwahahahahha!!! you ain't winning no debates. you're just a persistent bastard.

1) dirrell got robbed in an ugly messy fight... its academic

2) bradley beat up witter and still only got a split

3) you can't apply that paradigm on froch/taylor... taylor scored a knock down although froch was coming on stronger as taylor began to fade. essentiallly that fight is much more complex than that simplistic formula. but in the end, it didn't matter cause froch stopped taylor.

finally, to reiterate the point.... dirrell got robbed in rottingham.

robbed is where everyone agrees with you...all the top boxing media outlets and important people all thought froch won..including showtime which agreed froch won by decision, even without the point deduction...they only kicked off that it should have been only 1 round to froch and not by 3 rounds..

Basically you have failed...

[ThePunchingBag]

Froch is a crap champion.. but you're right, there was no robbery. Dirrell's tactics lost him the fight, not Froch's talent.

[-EAGLE-]

robbed is where everyone agrees with you...all the top boxing media outlets and important people all thought froch won..including showtime which agreed froch won by decision, even without the point deduction...they only kicked off that it should have been only 1 round to froch and not by 3 rounds..

Basically you have failed...

I wanted Froch to win man; believe me! But when i saw the fight i scored it myself and I had Dirrell winnig! I REALLY DID! (i'm European).

[RockyB]

What do you really like about Froch?

[Spray_resistant]

Froch will keep winning even though he lacks alot of natural talent and this is because of his toughness and unwavering belief in himself......this will be just an unbelievable winning streak for a crude brawler at a world class level you will see and wonder how this keeps happening.

[Syf]

What do you really like about Froch?

Is Froch being British enough reason?

No? Okay, then he probably likes blood and guts brawler types.

[slimshandy69]

I wanted Froch to win man; believe me! But when i saw the fight i scored it myself and I had Dirrell winnig! I REALLY DID! (i'm European).

you are obviously a calsalppe fan...caLSLAPPE lost to bernard hopkings because he actually got kncoked down, opened up his nose and calslappe landed not one clean shot all nightr..

Comnpare that to froch dirrell, well just look at my sig, froch out worked him, wanted to fiight bloodied dirrell nose and lipsd and thats why boxing scene, ea5t5ide boxing, the ringside press, showtime commnetators, prime time commnetators, allan green and most importantly the non british judges scored froch winning and rightly so..

I could not give dirrell one round, his best round was the round he got deducted a point...

So you are talking absolute crap...