BoxRec

Horse wrote:

lillywhite14 wrote:I suspect Froch and Kessler won't take in to account what you want to see if they fancy the rubber match.

You think?

You gave a reason for Froch not fighting Kessler again as being that you don't want to see it!

It's hardly a reason is it? Very likely that it won't impact on the chances of it being made

thepocketrocket wrote:I also had the fight a draw, though I admit Froch won his round bigger than Kessler.

My problem is the sheep mentality of pundits. Hatton's adjustment of his card to fit in with the common consensus, and Jim 'What?' giving Froch the 11th, solely to keep pace with the 'Froch is winning this by a good few rounds' mentality annoys me....stick to your guns.

Look at it this way, a draw is more realistic than the 118-110 scorecard

Mathematically perhaps but a draw would have been a bigger robbery than one judge scoring it too wide IMO. 2/3 points was the difference. Certainly no more than 4, but Carl definitely won that fight.

MarkMcBurney wrote:

thepocketrocket wrote:I also had the fight a draw, though I admit Froch won his round bigger than Kessler.

My problem is the sheep mentality of pundits. Hatton's adjustment of his card to fit in with the common consensus, and Jim 'What?' giving Froch the 11th, solely to keep pace with the 'Froch is winning this by a good few rounds' mentality annoys me....stick to your guns.

Look at it this way, a draw is more realistic than the 118-110 scorecard

Mathematically perhaps but a draw would have been a bigger robbery than one judge scoring it too wide IMO. 2/3 points was the difference. Certainly no more than 4, but Carl definitely won that fight.

I disagree to be fair. If you are properly scoring the fight, then the draw is feasable, 118-110 isn't.

A draw would not have been a robbery, a two point scorecard is a difference of opinion on ONE round, 116-112 is a difference of opinion on TWO rounds. When people talk about winning by four rounds, it creates 'a robbery' when there is none, due to people missing this point.

But Froch won because he left no room for argument oin the six rounds he won. Kessler sneaked a few of his in tight rounds...all you need is a couple of differences of opinion, and Froch wins the fight.

I will say it felt like Froch won the fight, and peobably deserved it. But I won't be changing my scorecard like Watt or Hatton. Like Roy Walker 'I say what I see'

There's no way Kessler actually won any more than 4 round. I had him as level 10-10 on a couple but Froch won at least 5 clearly IMO. I can't see how Kessler can feasibly have won any more than that.

MarkMcBurney wrote:There's no way Kessler actually won any more than 4 round. I had him as level 10-10 on a couple but Froch won at least 5 clearly IMO. I can't see how Kessler can feasibly have won any more than that.

OK, he won four rounds for you...the comments ' I can't see how Kessler can feasably have won any more than that' and 'I had him level 10-10 on a couple' are not mutually compatible. It doesn't take a stretch to say that to some a rounds which you have as a draw can, to some people, slide one way or the other (maybe to Kessler)

Froch won and I am sure you are happy. I am just pointing out how a two to threepoint scorecard can end up level very easy

Finally caught up with Froch-Kessler 2 and i had it 118-112 for Froch. Lots of close rounds, but Froch's jab was the key and an improved work rate.
Froch hasn't a prayer against Ward, unless both of Andre's hands are broken next time, but Kessler-Froch 3 on neutral ground to settle the trilogy would do nicely.