prove to me dirrell got robbed against froch..

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Because he was a Yank who didnt get a decision away from home. No further proof needed.

[The Gambler1981]

Evidence of this? Compubox numbers perhaps?

I don't know watch the fight it is pretty clear who is the one landing the clean effective scoring blows.

[The_Demon]

dirrell landed 4 times the amount of punches that froch did

there you go kid

[Danny Gunz]

neither of them really won the fight in my mind.

But dirrell did much more to deserve the victory then froch

[The Gambler1981]

Is clean effective punching not the most important thing in scoring fights now?

[Postman prat]

because froch sucks and we all hate him.

[slimshandy69]

Evidence of this? Compubox numbers perhaps?

Only HBO use computerbox, there were no computerbox for this as showtime do not do compiuterbox.Please dont give me that horrendous link of youtubed that lied and claimed dirrell threw over 600 punches and landed 240 of them, he didt even throw 240 punches....next

froch landed 3% of his punches
dirrell landed about 38%

/thread.

Sorry, but dirrell had a bloody nose, bloody lips, and a swollen eye after 4 rounds froch didnt have a scratch after 12...

So by your horrnedous logic frochs 3 percent landed punches are 1000000 times more powerful than the 38 percent ofpunches landed by dirrell...????

I sorry the fights for all to see, the first rounds i actually cannot even socre for dirrell, he literally did nothing...

How a guy fighting for a wbc title,and not press the fight..it was embarrassing...henc WHY HIS OWN PROMOTER SAID IT WAS NO ROBBERRY...


comon folks the best shot was frochs hook round 8...fact.

[Hi-Dro]

wtf? I thought you were trolling by making this thread but from your avi I see you are a froch fan. Dirrell beat froch and get robbed and thats it. i dont even like dirrell but anyone with eyes could have seen that

[Pugilistic™]

No one can prove anything to you.

Your blinded by your love for Froch so it would be pointless.

Point is, Dirrell won this fight. If you have a brain and scored the fight with the four scoring criterias that you follow in pro boxing you would of had Dirrell winning.

Clean effective punching: Dirrell landed consistently, and the shots he threw were clean hard shots. Froch landed rarely and was only able to land one shot at a time.

Ring generalship: Dirrell controlled the tempo of this fight with his movement and speed and all Froch could do was come forward.

Defense: Froch doesn't know the meaning of it and was hit constantly. Dirrell used his movement, head movement, etc to make Froch miss alot and would counter effectively.

Effective agression: Froch was aggressive, but he wasn't effective with it at all. He came forward but landed no shots and was getting countered throughout the fight.

Dirrell held abit yeah, but Froch was no better with his dirty tactics that he used.

Dirrell won clearly, and i'm sure the majority agree with me besides Froch fans.

[The Hammer]

Carl Froch deserved to win.

I scored it 114-113 for Froch, the same as Dan Rafael.

Dirrell's childish behaviour - falling down deliberately, holding, running, sticking out his tongue - was DISGRACEFUL.