Malignaggi vs Broner June 22nd

[Mad King]

No, all three are WW's.

My bad. I meant that as like hes moving up in the sense that hes gonna start fighting the top guys.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

117-111 was ridiculous

No it wasn't. I gave Paulie 5 rounds but giving him three is just as easy. He only took 3 clear rounds the whole fight. Broner took 7 clearly. 2 were toss-ups. At worst, that's 7-5 for Broner.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

People seem to confuse the words "competitive" and "close"

 

[Casual Fan]

 

[Mad King]

No it wasn't. I gave Paulie 5 rounds but giving him three is just as easy. He only took 3 clear rounds the whole fight. Broner took 7 clearly. 2 were toss-ups. At worst, that's 7-5 for Broner.

I agree, I thought paulie made almost every round competitive but not all im gonna score for him.

 

[surf fu]

I doubt broner intends to stay at 147. His move to 147 was to give him a perceived easy fight while everyone at 140 beats the shit out of each other.

There is no way in hell Haymon let's him fight at 140. Not until he improves at least.

that division is full of sharks.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

I don't think Broner is staying at 147 personally but who knows what Haymon, Schaefer, and co. have planned. Broner doesn't seem like the type to do a lot of thinking on his own... about anything (e.g. eating out random, sweaty strippers on stage)

 

[Funkasaurus]

Paulie threw a lot but you knew there was no power behind them

So it confuses people, what should you score on?

 

[propergeezer]

Paulie threw a lot but you knew there was no power behind them

So it confuses people, what should you score on?

I really don't feel that Broner landed many clean shots with his feet actually planted and weight behind them. The vast majority of shots I saw him landing were pitter patter ones just like Paulie was landing... I counted about 8 or so power punches that landed clean by Broner, and none of them ever seemed to catch Paulie by surprise. I wasn't impressed that over 12 rounds, Broner couldn't land one clean hard shot that caught Paulie off-guard. So I feel he performed rather miserably. Also his defense looked poor, his footwork awful and overall technique more clumsy than I ever remember it looking.

A guy with Paulie's traits, all that movement, feinting, taking good angles etc. will make anyone look bad, so there's that too.

I'm really just kinda hating on Broner here because I'm so fucking sick of seeing those 2 ugly ass twins and his entrance made me want to pull a van gogh

 

[Seano]

Paulie threw a lot but you knew there was no power behind them

So it confuses people, what should you score on?

Ther shouldn't be confusion. Power isn't a judges criteria.

 

[XCuTioNeR]

Paulie threw a lot but you knew there was no power behind them

So it confuses people, what should you score on?

Clean punches.
Effective aggressiveness.
Ring generalship.
Defense.

 

[spiderRico]

Ther shouldn't be confusion. Power isn't a judges criteria.

yes I agree, and also broners power was exaggerated by shotime, they said "malignaggi is hurt" and made it sound as if he was going to be stopped.

paulie looked like he was out of gas then he pulled out a couple of rounds out to deserve a draw.

 

[Hollywood Nicky]

thought the fight was close, thought broner was exposed, if someone keeps punching him, he folds up a bit and freezes. thought broner bringing a girl into the situation was pretty low, and he lost me as a fan as a result. the guy has no class what so ever.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

thought the fight was close, thought broner was exposed, if someone keeps punching him, he folds up a bit and freezes. thought broner bringing a girl into the situation was pretty low, and he lost me as a fan as a result. the guy has no class what so ever.

You were actually a fan of his?

 

[The Batkilt]

Ther shouldn't be confusion. Power isn't a judges criteria.

People mistake "clean & effective" punching with "power". Another problem is some fighters do tend to snap their head back a bit when they've been punched - sometimes they pull their head back in an attempt to either avoid a punch or lessen the effect of it - and folk mistake that for "they've been stunned".

 

[Seano]

I just look to see if the punch lands when I'm judging from my couch. If it wasn't blocked, its clean.

I don't like that some people think that a jab can't be as effective a punch as a hook. "Effective" doesn't mean "visibly hurt." It can be pitty pat shots that keep a guy on the defensive, a jab that keeps the other guy from throwing his shots, a touching blow that scores while the other guy is doing nothing etc.

 

[johnnystone]

Ther shouldn't be confusion. Power isn't a judges criteria.

True but power punches clean at least imply significant punches, in contrast to soft jabs. Although I wasn't impresed at all by Broner's power, he didn't hurt Paulie at all imo.

 

[o336mr]

People mistake "clean & effective" punching with "power". Another problem is some fighters do tend to snap their head back a bit when they've been punched - sometimes they pull their head back in an attempt to either avoid a punch or lessen the effect of it - and folk mistake that for "they've been stunned".

Indeed. It's called a pull, when it's timed perfectly a fighter looks like a god, when it's mistimed slightly it still reduces most of the power of the punch, but simply because the glove connects people assume it was the force of the punch snapping his head back.

 

[The Batkilt]

I don't think compubox helps. The guys involved have said it shouldn't be used when judging a fight, and a big reason for that imo is that any punch that isn't a jab is a "power punch," and a lot of people therefore think that those punches are the most important thing; regardless of the type of punch. You can't judge based on stats; you need to watch and decided who landed the cleaner, more effective punches. Usually the guy doing so also has the upper hand in at least one of the other three categories.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

the "effective" part of "clean and effective" says to me that power should mean something.

It's a matter of if you think one or two clean shots that buckle a guy's legs are more effective than 7 or 8 jabs that aren't hard but also land clean and affect the opponent's performance enough to win him the round.

Clean and effective shots aren't the only judging criteria but if we put into just this one simple context, then I don't really have a problem with scoring the rd for either guy although I tend to favor the guy who landed the harder, cleaner, more visibly effective shots than the other. How much power a guy lands with has to be taken into consideration as does the amount of clean shots someone is able to land as well. In Paulie's case though, the rds I gave him were from pure effective aggression imo.

I've been thinking about making a thread about this where I dig up competitive rds on yt and ask people to score the rd in either guy's favor, but have been too lazy and don't know if it'll be worth it in the end. It would give us a good idea of how we look at rds from the other people's perspective imo.