Comments Thread For: 'Fighting Words' - Andre Ward: The Second Coming of the Son of God

[IMDAZED]

2 of the judges had Ward winning by just 2 points. Froch won the last 2 rounds on all the scorecards, If I remember correctly. He was never hurt at any stage and finished stronger than Ward.

It was a clear win for Ward, I'm not dis*****g that, but a one-sided drubbing it most definitely wasn't.

So because the judges scored it a certain way, it was close? And you're asking others if they watched the fight? Lol ok.

[kafkod]

So because the judges scored it a certain way, it was close? And you're asking others if they watched the fight? Lol ok.

Did I say it was a close fight?

Does a fight have to be either close or a one-sided drubbing, with no other interpretations possible?

I've watched it at least 5 times and I've scored it round by round twice, already knowing the result, so I wasn't influenced by wishful thinking, as a Froch fan.

I made Andre the winner by 4 rounds, with Froch winning the 11th and 12th.

But the judges were ringside, and 2 of them saw it as closer than I did.

[MDPopescu]

Did I say it was a close fight?

Does a fight have to be either close or a one-sided drubbing, with no other interpretations possible?

I've watched it at least 5 times and I've scored it round by round twice, already knowing the result, so I wasn't influenced by wishful thinking, as a Froch fan.

I made Andre the winner by 4 rounds, with Froch winning the 11th and 12th.

But the judges were ringside, and 2 of them saw it as closer than I did.

... and it was precisely the British judge who had Ward winning 10 rounds...

[IMDAZED]

Did I say it was a close fight?

Does a fight have to be either close or a one-sided drubbing, with no other interpretations possible?

I've watched it at least 5 times and I've scored it round by round twice, already knowing the result, so I wasn't influenced by wishful thinking, as a Froch fan.

I made Andre the winner by 4 rounds, with Froch winning the 11th and 12th.

But the judges were ringside, and 2 of them saw it as closer than I did.

Your argument was based on what the judges scored so the point still stands. Why use them at all?

And yes, it was one-sided. The 11th and 12th were moot.

[Froch_uppercut]

How does this guy make any type of headlines, it's not even possible to place a bet on his fight with Barrera.

I was really struggling to find any odds at all, but yesterday found some.

Gotta bet 7 to win 1 on Ward, plus get your money back, so a bet of 7 returns 8 including stake. (1/7 odds UK style, not sure how to express that in US odds)

And Barerra is 9/2 against. Even 5/1 with William Hills.

Here`s a link to oddschecker, they compare all bookies prices on major events, looking now William Hill has added odds.



Good luck, hope Ward gets smashed, but I think it`s too much to ask of Barrera, but Kovalev will crush him.

[kafkod]

Your argument was based on what the judges scored so the point still stands. Why use them at all?

And yes, it was one-sided. The 11th and 12th were moot.

Why use the judges scores at all when assessing a fight?

That has got to be one of the ******est comments I've ever seen posted here, which is saying a lot!

[kafkod]

... and it was precisely the British judge who had Ward winning 10 rounds...

True. I think he was trying so hard not to be seen as biased towards Froch that he ended up being biased against him.

A lot of the rounds could have been scored either way, because it was a typical Andre Ward fight - scrappy and uneventful. The British judge gave all those rounds to Ward.

[NaijaD]

True. I think he was trying so hard not to be seen as biased towards Froch that he ended up being biased against him.

A lot of the rounds could have been scored either way, because it was a typical Andre Ward fight - scrappy and uneventful. The British judge gave all those rounds to Ward.

How are you gonna criticise dazed for his comment and then come back with that??

So by your post, Froch had a claim to winning that fight then?

Ward clearly won, I had it 9-3 for him.... Froch made a late push but by then the decision was clearly in the bag for Ward.

Yeah scrappy and uneventful, but you'll be the first to justify Fury's performance against Wlad, which was by far a worse fight. The lack of consistency amongst posters here is astonishing.

[kafkod]

How are you gonna criticise dazed for his comment and then come back with that??

So by your post, Froch had a claim to winning that fight then?

Ward clearly won, I had it 9-3 for him.... Froch made a late push but by then the decision was clearly in the bag for Ward.

Yeah scrappy and uneventful, but you'll be the first to justify Fury's performance against Wlad, which was by far a worse fight. The lack of consistency amongst posters here is astonishing.

A boxer can win a fight clearly WITHOUT it being a one-sided fight.

Ward beat Froch clearly but Froch made him work hard and was coming on strong at the end. To me, that's NOT a one-sided fight.

Fury's performance vs Wlad was totally different from anything Andre Ward is capable of producing.

Fury used pure defensive boxing - footwork, feints and movement - to maintain distance, confuse Wlad and stack up points.

Fury is a boxer. Ward is a spoiler like Wlad, but without Wlad's KO power.

Fury's style of clean defensive boxing can win him fights anywhere.

He doesn't need home advantage every time or "friendly" refs who let him get away with holding and clinching, like Ward does.

[IMDAZED]

Why use the judges scores at all when assessing a fight?

That has got to be one of the ******est comments I've ever seen posted here, which is saying a lot!

You would think that because you aren't very bright yourself. Why would I use someone else's scorecard to justify my own?