Don't call a fight a robbery unless you feel the loser CLEARLY won 8 rounds or more

Should be a sticky.
Ban repeat offenders. Sarcasm. But kind of for real. Lol
 
cottagecheesefan said:
That is also how I saw both fights. However, I admit, a lot of rounds in both fights were very close. I have no problem with either decision, or would have no problem if either went the other way.
Click to expand...
I thought Jacobs/Golovkin was a lot closer than Kovalev/Ward. I think casual fans get too hung up on power. I think a lot of fans score rounds with a bias to whoever has the bigger rep as a hitter.
 
Necrocide said:
I see what you did there. Because you had an insanely lopsided scorecard that no official judge, member of press row, or respected member of the boxing community had anything even remotely close to, I'M the one that doesn't know anything. I'm glad I can count on you to tell me who's really winning.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you undermined me from the get go talking shit about my card, 9-3(w/10-8rd) isn't necessarily lopsided, it can still be a fight that was closer than the cards indicate, but cards are cards, and I don't apologize for giving the rounds to who I believe won. I'm extremely passionate about boxing, I score with hopes of deciding who really won, I can't stand when the wrong guy gets it, they leave a piece of themselves in there every fucking time, I'm not letting you or any number of posters or experts, or even judges bully me into doubting what I saw or diminish it's truth. I embrace boxings success stories, and have my sentimental favs, but I embrace the sport as a whole, not selected fighters.

Also, you should learn the scoring criteria, just because you are an MMA fan pretending to have boxing knowledge doesn't = you get to use the 8 sided OCTAGON scoring criteria where you add extra criteria for more extreme results.

Hopefully Jacobs gets the Canelo fight, not GGG, I already know Jacobs can beat GGG, so the fight Im really excited to see is Jacobs/Canelo.

Also Lemeiux is a good option, it's a good fight as a backup.
 
Seano said:
You don't score damage. How bloody a guy is, or having an eye closed has nothing to do with scoring. You also left out defense 25% ,of the equation and made up a criteria, damage, which is telling.
Click to expand...

Damage meaning a guy clearly being hurt by a punch. Wobbled, dazed, etc. I'm aware you don't score blood/swelling/etc.

Scoring blood is what screwed Roman.
 
borntoloseNOT said:
Yeah, you undermined me from the get go talking shit about my card, 9-3(w/10-8rd) isn't necessarily lopsided, it can still be a fight that was closer than the cards indicate, but cards are cards, and I don't apologize for giving the rounds to who I believe won. I'm extremely passionate about boxing, I score with hopes of deciding who really won, I can't stand when the wrong guy gets it, they leave a piece of themselves in there every fucking time, I'm not letting you or any number of posters or experts, or even judges bully me into doubting what I saw or diminish it's truth. I embrace boxings success stories, and have my sentimental favs, but I embrace the sport as a whole, not selected fighters.

Also, you should learn the scoring criteria, just because you are an MMA fan pretending to have boxing knowledge doesn't = you get to use the 8 sided OCTAGON scoring criteria where you add extra criteria for more extreme results.

Hopefully Jacobs gets the Canelo fight, not GGG, I already know Jacobs can beat GGG, so the fight Im really excited to see is Jacobs/Canelo.

Also Lemeiux is a good option, it's a good fight as a backup.
Click to expand...

I like both fighters. I hate MMA, sorry to disappoint you.

Yes, I took issue with your scorecard immediately because 9-3 is absolutely absurd.

Be passionate. Score however you want. Just know that objectively, by every possible measure, and according to literally everyone in the sport (some of whom have spent literally decades in and around boxing), you're wrong.
 
There have been a handful of.fights I considered to be blatant robberies.

And yes, I agree.this term is used too liberally.

Felix strum vs dlh

Lara vs Paul Williams

These two immediately come to mind.

Ggg vs Jacobs was not a robbery
 
Necrocide said:
I like both fighters. I hate MMA, sorry to disappoint you.

Yes, I took issue with your scorecard immediately because 9-3 is absolutely absurd.

Be passionate. Score however you want. Just know that objectively, by every possible measure, and according to literally everyone in the sport (some of whom have spent literally decades in and around boxing), you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Nope. Gotta disagree. But you've already committed from the start, something you accuse me of, so why continue? Jacobs ran away with it, sorry, but GGG got a boxing lesson.

On the topic of scoring, how'd you feel about Andre/Kov?
 
I agree people put too much stock in power. Unless the punches are actually hurting the guy and he's getting wobbled/dropped repeatedly, what does power matter if he's just getting hit like any other punch and is able to box perfectly and land at will against said power puncher, all while eating his shots easily?

Just because someone has power doesn't mean they are actually hitting a guy with it every single time. Otherwise GGG would KO people with every punch he landed.
 
borntoloseNOT said:
Nope. Gotta disagree. But you've already committed from the start, something you accuse me of, so why continue? Jacobs ran away with it, sorry, but GGG got a boxing lesson.

On the topic of scoring, how'd you feel about Andre/Kov?
Click to expand...

Thought Kovalev won by a point but it was a close fight and understand the official scoring.

And even if your intentions were pure and you didn't have Jacobs winning the fight before the bell rang, you're still objectively wrong. If you believe the official judges got it wrong because they're protecting GGG-Canela, so be it.

What motivation would people on press row, in the media, and across the Internet that have no voice in how anything gets done in boxing have for "protecting" Gennady?

This is the boxing equivalent of asking for Obama's birth certificate.

Edit: How did you score Jirov vs Toney? Because after seeing your comments on Ward-Kovalev, it helps frame what you see in a fight.
 
Sharkey said:
This isn't about last night's fight, but if Figher A wins 7 rounds clear enough and Fighter B wins 5 rounds clear enough, and the decision goes to Fighter B then I certainly going to call out the judges for a bad decision even if it's a 115-113 type fight. At least two of the judges would have screwed up and gave 2 rounds to a fighter they shouldn't have in that scenario, which is wrong. I don't need 8 rounds.
Click to expand...
Im not sure this was a fight where one fighter clearly won 7 and the other one 5. There was a lot of close rounds
 
XThe GreatestX said:
Im not sure this was a fight where one fighter clearly won 7 and the other one 5. There was a lot of close rounds
Click to expand...

Which is why I started that post off by saying "This isn't about last night's fight".
 
Necrocide said:
Thought Kovalev won by a point but it was a close fight and understand the official scoring.

And even if your intentions were pure and you didn't have Jacobs winning the fight before the bell rang, you're still objectively wrong. If you believe the official judges got it wrong because they're protecting GGG-Canela, so be it.

What motivation would people on press row, in the media, and across the Internet that have no voice in how anything gets done in boxing have for "protecting" Gennady?

This is the boxing equivalent of asking for Obama's birth certificate.

Edit: How did you score Jirov vs Toney? Because after seeing your comments on Ward-Kovalev, it helps frame what you see in a fight.
Click to expand...

I didn't have any money or personal stake riding on Danny's performance Saturday, I have no motive.

116-110 Toney.

After a fresh rewatch, too, since I hadnt seen Toney/Jirov in a while.
 
I had Jacobs winning but the more I think about it, I along with a lot of people might have been persuaded by Jacobs flurries from the outside. A lot of them weren't hitting the target. That's what's hard to judge in the moment. What hits gloves and what hits the body/face.
 
SebbeSwe said:
I had Jacobs winning but the more I think about it, I along with a lot of people might have been persuaded by Jacobs flurries from the outside. A lot of them weren't hitting the target. That's what's hard to judge in the moment. What hits gloves and what hits the body/face.
Click to expand...

True, and I have always wondered how compubox and whatever can know for sure which shots do connect and do not. Especially against someone with a Floyd like defense. 90% of the shots are hitting glove and who knows how many are counted as clean? I don't put much faith into punch stats personally
 
SebbeSwe said:
I had Jacobs winning but the more I think about it, I along with a lot of people might have been persuaded by Jacobs flurries from the outside. A lot of them weren't hitting the target. That's what's hard to judge in the moment. What hits gloves and what hits the body/face.
Click to expand...
Stuff like that falls under effective aggression IMO. If a guy is throwing shots that slow the pace, make the other guy cover up in an otherwise close round, thats what can give them the edge. That along with defense, which Jacobs did well too and ring generalship too. I didn't see Jacobs getting caught on the ropes too often, he seemed to have been controlling the pace of a lot of the fight.

golovkin did win rounds with clean punching, don't get me wrong, but some of those close rounds should have gone to the boxer IMO.
 
borntoloseNOT said:
You also called GGG getting dec after scoring it (correctly) for Danny, lol, nice


Nice try. I score fights to see who wins, not a thing to do with favoritism. Don't worry, I couldn't tell who was really winning when I first started watching boxing either
Click to expand...
well, apparently you still cant tell who is winning a fight considering you were way off with the actual judges on this one too. Nice try being pretentious tho
 
Seano said:
I saw it pretty wide too. I thought Jacobs took Golovkin out of his comfort zone and reduced him to stealing rounds with flurries.

I thought the same thing about Kovalev/Ward. Walking forward doesn't mean your winning necessarily. It might mean you're getting outboxed.
Click to expand...

Wait. Golovkin was throwimg flurries?

You do know he was the white one right?

Because all i saw GGG doing was consistently landing his jab, jarring Jacobs skull, and trying to cut him off as Danny "Walked him" 'round the ring.

Thats where jacobs excelled, not letting Golovkin consistently put his (power) punches together.

So your totally right about the comfort zone thing. Jacobs denied Golovkin the handplay he likes to use to lull his opponents, gauge their distance, and set his timing.

Thats a credit to Danny's feet, his use of angles, and his wilingness to throw flurries of punches to nullify golovkins timing and rythem.

That being said, i still think he lost.

And on topic: 100% agree with the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,714
Messages
55,436,668
Members
174,775
Latest member
Ruckus245

Share this page

Back
Top