http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wloqFAx7pTU
Go to 5:40
One of Johnsons' team says:
"Carl won the fight, there's nobody up here who doesn't think he won the fight"
Final; nail in the coffin for the draw arguement.
Listen, the point that keeps coming across is that Johnson landed a lot of big right hands. I agree, that's fair enough.crusader wrote:if you cannot understand how a case can be made that Johnson won some of those rounds (particularly the first, seventh, and eighth) then it seems to me like you aren't being objective in scoring.
But you said that Johnson landed the harder punches... Froch was bale to force Johnson back, when he got too close, but Johnson's best punches did every little damage to Froch.crusader wrote:I never said that Johnson hurt Froch, I said that Froch looked a bit uncomfortable. Just because someone looks uncomfortable when they are getting hit with hard punches to the body doesn't necessarily mean that they are about to take a knee or are wincing in agony.
You are being narrow-minded, and ignoring evidence. I voted Froch wins by 4 rounds because there as no other options for my scorecard.crusader wrote:Look at the poll, over 50 people thought Froch won by three rounds or less, and many others had Froch up by four. To me it seems like the consensus is that it was a relatively close fight.
from:crusader wrote:I don't think Froch controlled the tempo
Johnson wasn't pushed back regularly until the final four rounds, all of which I scored for Froch, and if simply moving backwards means a fighter is feeling his opponent's power (as you fallaciously believe), then Froch was obviously feeling Johnson's power for the first eight rounds of the fight. The fact that Johnson would put his hands up and occasionally move backward when Froch came forward with a flurry doesn't mean that the Road Warrior was hurt or unable to take Froch's shots, it just showed that he was trying to defend himself (i.e. not get hit with punches).Crease wrote:Listen, the point that keeps coming across is that Johnson landed a lot of big right hands. I agree, that's fair enough.crusader wrote:if you cannot understand how a case can be made that Johnson won some of those rounds (particularly the first, seventh, and eighth) then it seems to me like you aren't being objective in scoring.
But my point is Froch was unaffected by them, and Johnson had no answer for it, except just to throw another right hand a round later.But you said that Johnson landed the harder punches... Froch was bale to force Johnson back, when he got too close, but Johnson's best punches did every little damage to Froch.crusader wrote:I never said that Johnson hurt Froch, I said that Froch looked a bit uncomfortable. Just because someone looks uncomfortable when they are getting hit with hard punches to the body doesn't necessarily mean that they are about to take a knee or are wincing in agony.
Ok, so 52 people thought that there was no more than a three point gap in the scoring, while only 22 people thought Froch won by 4 points or more, and among that group of 22 I'm sure that there were several people who had no more more than a 4 point gap.Crease wrote:You are being narrow-minded, and ignoring evidence. I voted Froch wins by 4 rounds because there as no other options for my scorecard.crusader wrote:Look at the poll, over 50 people thought Froch won by three rounds or less, and many others had Froch up by four. To me it seems like the consensus is that it was a relatively close fight.
Other posters have actually commented on that topic saying that there should be more options in Froch's favour for a longer winning margin.
You said:from:crusader wrote:I don't think Froch controlled the tempo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wloqFAx7pTU
from 6:20
Johnsons' man said:
"Carl controlled the fight"
Everyone recognises that Froch controlled the fight except you.
Fights are scored round by round, so a judge can still have a fighter winning at the end of the bout (as I had Froch winning) even if that fighter did not control things in every round.the sixth was extremely close (I gave it to Froch when I watched the fight a second time) and could have gone either way, but watching it live I thought Johnson landed the harder punches and I don't think Froch controlled the tempo
I haven't come across any post arguing that Johnson should've won the fight. The debate here is about how many rounds Johnson could've been given. I'm not sure if Crease has caught on yet, but I actually think that Froch beat Johnson.Autobarn wrote:are ppl really trying to say this fight was controversial?