Discussion in 'Boxing Discussion' started by codfather, Dec 4, 2018.
just looked at hte front page and wtf? There are like 11 troll threads by two separate people
Not favoring? LMAO. He gave Fury 7 rounds. Dude, this is the boxing section of Sherdog.com
Literally none of those fights were robberies.
Fury-Wilder: I had Fury winning by two points, could see a 113-113 card as reasonable though. Not a robbery.
GGG-Canelo II: I had it a 6-6 draw. Win for either guy isn't a robbery.
GGG-Canelo I: I had Golovkin winning 7-5. Close fight. Draw was fine.
Pacquiao-Horn: I had Pacquiao a few rounds ahead but he kept taking large portions of rounds off and that made it a lot closer than it should've been. Not a robbery but the closest one to it imo.
Jacobs-GGG: I had Golovkin winning.
Chisora-Whye: I had it a draw. Win for either guy isn't a robbery.
oh and Ward-Kovalev: I had Ward winning. There were a lot of close rounds that I scored for Ward, while Kovalev had the knockdown and the more clear dominant rounds. So even though I had Ward nicking it, I expected the judges to give the fight to Kovalev as I thought it'd be unlikely that they keep scoring close rounds to Ward like I did. But, they gave it to Ward. Not a robbery, close fight.
I want to vote both Fury-Wilder and GGG-Canelo 1. Both were atrocious.
Same here, those are the top 2 for sure.
Edit: I thought Kovalev won too but that wasn't as bad of a decision.
Evan as a big GGG fan I gotta admit Fury got robbed even worse. I'm a big Pac fan too, and I don't even think he got robbed against Horn, but I didn't have the best stream going to be honest
exactly, if he'd given the entire 8 then Fury would've walked away with the WBC belt
Horn was given points for landing illegal blows, it was sickening.
if the Brit had given Wilder just 1 rmore ound it would've been a Majority Decision for Wilder. loop theories innit
I know, it's crazy.
and the same people would be in here claiming it wasn't a robbery still
close fights aren't robberies. many boxing fans per this fight cant even find fights with TWO 10-8 cards and claim a robbery....particularly with that 12 round flooring. It was a close fight. Brits don't want to acknowledge that when the math is in the scorecards rather clearly
Wilder blocked a lot of punches by Tyson using the high guard.. This compubox counted all those shots.... Shots landed or effective punches somehow weren't applied to this bout
If we can extend this to 4 years, the answer would be very obvious.
But since it's 3 years I voted Ward Kovalev 1.
I felt with the knockdown, and with Kovalev winning more rounds decisively, he should've been awarded the victory. The only way Ward wins this fight, is if you give every close round to Ward which is ridiculous. He simply didn't have as many decisive rounds as Kovalev and was somehow awarded all the close rounds.
I can't forgive Golovkin for giving up the first half of the Canelo rematch. In that regard I simply cannot call that fight a robbery.
Whyte - Chisora was a low quality fight that I really don't care much about.
Jacobs vs. Golovkin was definitely not a robbery as Golovkin clearly won. I think people were giving Jacobs extra credit because he didn't get blown out.
Pacquiao vs. Horn - I felt Pacquiao won, but he let Horn impose his size too often. I can't call it an outright robbery.
Fury vs. Wilder - I felt Fury clearly won, but you can't ignore the two knockdowns which played against him clearly as the judges scores indicated.
A robbery is when one guy clearly dominates, but loses. Just to be clear what a robbery is, some of you guys need to youtube:
Roy Jones Jr. vs Park Si-Hun
There's degrees of robberies, just cause someone didn't lose didn't mean they weren't robbed of a win.
No "none of the above" option?
If you keep getting close rounds, and keep seeing them slightly edged by one fighter, then you're going to keep awarding those close rounds to that one fighter, which isn't unlikely if your method for scoring a fight is consistent. Four rounds like that in a row and you'll end up 4-0. It's not like you see four close rounds, and you're like, "eh well they're very close to I'll say 3-1".
Of course, you judge on a round-by-round basis. You can't retroactively score the close rounds once the fight is over.
What I believe happened in the Kovalev Ward fight is that because Kovalev was so dominant early on, all the close rounds later on ended up being judged on the standards of his dominant rounds. So just because he didn't look as dominant in those rounds as he did earlier, the judges falsely assumed he lost them.
The judges are human and make that mistake many times. I witnessed it last week when somehow the judges ended up giving Jean Pascal a single round, in some cases 2 rounds, against Bivol when he was clearly dominated and lost all the rounds. The reason here was because Bivol wasn't as dominant as he was early on and the perception that was Pascal won those rounds, when in reality he didn't .
They showed up for fight week and haven't left yet. We could use a purge.
Separate names with a comma.