I'm not saying lean a certain way because one fighter is a champ.But I do believe the fighter coming to take a belt has to take it and show he is taking it.How do you say a guy who is avoiding and running(Once again avoiding is not boxing)do you really believe that fighter should win a belt?I felt Hoya beat Tito but I was not mad that Tito got the nod because he was putting the pressure on and Hoya was just avoiding(Running not Boxing)trying not to take a punch.I see what your saying and you are right in most cases.But the Froch Dirrell fight is not one of umm Dirrell deserved to loses that fight there was no robbery.
Comments Thread For: Carl Froch Claims Kessler Robbery, Attacks Sauerland, More
Collapse
-
-
It was a close fight with close rounds. The judges who scored it 117-111 and 116-112 gave all (or most) of the close rounds to Kessler. Im not saying Froch won, He lost. But it was a close fight despite what Roger Tilleman thinks.Comment
-
Well I did not say the Froch Kessler fight was a robbery.But for you to say that it was'int a close fight is crazy??But everybody see's the fight they see.I don't mind Kessler won but I have to admit I had Froch ahead by two points.See we seen different fights.But I think you should check this fight out again cause do it was a close fight.Comment
-
Comment
-
Im not a Froch fan, far from it, but he can feel hard done by imo, i had the fight a draw, possibly swaying to Froch on harder punches landed, Kessler seem to get it on his willingness to take it to Froch, albeit he was not particularly effective getting stuff done when he got there, that said it could of gone either way so there should be no excuses from Froch, plus he did rob Dirrell so he can hardly complain.
Sauerland is a crooked SOB, im almost certain he was telling Abraham the score in one of his fights.Comment
Comment