Who else had Bradley (draw), Ward, and Canelo winning in "controversial" fights

[Hagler]

I had all 3 winning actually. Interesting point, as it sort if shows the bias that fans have towards punchers.

Some fans just can't see guys with power doing anything wrong.

To each his own, I guess. Some other guys cannot give punchers credit when they outland and outwork their opponents even when they don't wreck them. A bias towards technical fighters does exist, even if it's less common. It depends on personal preferences. It is fortunate for GGG that Moretti doesn't seem to have it as he was able to call the Hagler fight for Leonard and saturday's fight for Golovkin.

That being said, to answer the thread I had Pacquiao and GGG winning and a draw between Ward and Kovalev. The decisions are OK as the fights were close. I needed to rewatch Pac-Bradley to get it. Pac's issue wasn't about technique but about workrate, a bit like what happened to Canelo against GGG.

 

[nac386]

Nah, the first fight was close. A drawish sort of fight. That was on of the first fights that made me realize that modern fans don't have any idea what they're looking at until Harold Lederman tells them what to see. Were you one of those people who scored rounds for Pac because he smiles, like Harold did?

This is where you implied the vast majority of people have no idea what they are seeing. Apparently almost everybody involved in boxing (actually everybody I can think of) picked Pac because he smiles.

 

[Shoemaker]

To each his own, I guess. Some other guys cannot give punchers credit when they outland and outwork their opponents even when they don't wreck them. A bias towards technical fighters does exist, even if it's less common. It depends on personal preferences. It is fortunate for GGG that Moretti doesn't seem to have it as he was able to call the Hagler fight for Leonard and saturday's fight for Golovkin.

That being said, to answer the thread I had Pacquiao and GGG winning and a draw between Ward and Kovalev. The decisions are OK as the fights were close. I needed to rewatch Pac-Bradley to get it. Pac's issue wasn't about technique but about workrate, a bit like what happened to Canelo against GGG.

I had thought about that earlier, actually. From a high level the story was kind of the similar. One guy was busier most of the rounds if not being horribly effective, with the other playing good defense and trying to steal rounds. I think Pac was just more consistent with his thievery. Manny was guilty of fighting 1 minute of every round; but during that minute he did fight his ass off. Canelo did that at times but it wasn't every round. That inconsistency nearly cost him (and did cost him in many peoples eyes).

 

[Seano]

This is where you implied the vast majority of people have no idea what they are seeing. Apparently almost everybody involved in boxing (actually everybody I can think of) picked Pac because he smiles.

Harold's logic for giving Pac one round of that fight. Also, do a search of that fight night thread and see how many of the forum regulars had it close or had Bradley winning.
"Oh but the poll!" like Tim Fucking Bradley has legions of fans out there spamming online polls.


And yeah, its not far off. Fans get enamored with a certain boxer and take it personally when that guy doesn't perform. I see it after every big fight where the exciting puncher shits the bed. You can try to say otherwise but there were a lot of fans who bought that fight only because it was Golovkin.


Also, Pac/Bradley isn't the same as Canelo/Golovkin either. Pac/Bradley was 3 experienced judges (one literally helped write the rules used to score the fight) all coming up with a similar score. Canelo/Golovkin was 2 judges seeing it one way and another with a weird score. So let me ask you, you know more about judging than Duane Ford? The guy who wrote the fucking rules? Fat Dan knows more? Teddy Atlas? Random pissed off sherdogger poster with Phillipines as his location?

 

[GloryOfIran]

Ward and Canelo can make an argument, Bradley lost clean.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

I had all 3 winning actually. Interesting point, as it sort if shows the bias that fans have towards punchers.

Some fans just can't see guys with power doing anything wrong.

or showing your bias towards boxers? Funny thing is you seem to have a problem with ppl who have a bias towards a certain style, like there's something wrong with that... You shouldn't feel bad about preferring a boxer over a puncher. Subjectivity is a big part of why this sport is so great.

@DeJulez to your point, I don't think Timmy deserved a win but being generous, I think you could give him a draw at best and still be able to put out a decent explanation for it (I scored that fight many times and had it anywhere from 116-112 Pac to 114-114).

I had Ward edging the first Kov fight, 114-113 but not gonna argue with ppl who had Kov winning.

I had GGG for this one, but nothing wrong with a Canelo card, imo. I still have to watch this fight at least two or three more times, to be sure of my overall score, though, as it seems to be a card that will be talked about for a longtime to come.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

Ward and Canelo can make an argument, Bradley lost clean.

Off topic but what is the weather like in Iran? Doesn't rain much, I'd assume? I hear it's nice weather over there most of the time but never been.

 

[GloryOfIran]

Off topic but what is the weather like in Iran? Doesn't rain much, I'd assume? I hear it's nice weather over there most of the time but never been.

Its nice. Similar to Texas. I havent been in 10 years though.

 

[Ryoto Machida]

All this proves is boxing fandom is filled with hipster douches who think that disagreeing with the mainstream take on a fight makes them look smart.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

All this proves is boxing fandom is filled with hipster douches who think that disagreeing with the mainstream take on a fight makes them look smart.

Cuse baby, CUSE!

We bleed that orange, bruv!

 

[Seano]

or showing your bias towards boxers? Funny thing is you seem to have a problem with ppl who have a bias towards a certain style, like there's something wrong with that... You shouldn't feel bad about preferring a boxer over a puncher. Subjectivity is a big part of why this sport is so great.

@DeJulez to your point, I don't think Timmy deserved a win but being generous, I think you could give him a draw at best and still be able to put out a decent explanation for it (I scored that fight many times and had it anywhere from 116-112 Pac to 114-114).

I had Ward edging the first Kov fight, 114-113 but not gonna argue with ppl who had Kov winning.

I had GGG for this one, but nothing wrong with a Canelo card, imo. I still have to watch this fight at least two or three more times, to be sure of my overall score, though, as it seems to be a card that will be talked about for a longtime to come.

I did score that fight a draw, BTW. Not sure why I said I had Tim winning. Honestly, I find it hard to find 7 clear rounds for anyone in that fight.
I favor the more skilled boxer when he wins most of the round. I favored the puncher when he takes the boxer out of his game. Golovkin never did that. Canelo had a game plan and follwed it for 12 rounds.
Pac lost his fight more than Bradley won it, I always said that. He took too much of every round off against a guy who was busy.

 

[OGquickdraw]

115-113 Pacquiao is the closest I can ever get

However, I do agree with Ward vs. Kov, and Canelo vs. GGG

Im also alright with a draw, it was a tough, TOUGH fight to score IMO.

 

[Canelo]

I have to correct myself I actually had Pac/Bradley a draw.

You scored it 115-113 Bradley on second watch.

 

[hiphopnazi]

I remember watching Pac vs Bradley and thinking. Pac is coasting most of the round and fighting in short spurts. I wasn't surprised with the decision.

Canelo did the same thing after like 3rd or 4th round against GGG.

 

[nac386]

Harold's logic for giving Pac one round of that fight. Also, do a search of that fight night thread and see how many of the forum regulars had it close or had Bradley winning.
"Oh but the poll!" like Tim Fucking Bradley has legions of fans out there spamming online polls.

And yeah, its not far off. Fans get enamored with a certain boxer and take it personally when that guy doesn't perform. I see it after every big fight where the exciting puncher shits the bed. You can try to say otherwise but there were a lot of fans who bought that fight only because it was Golovkin.

There were WAY more fans who bought that fight only because it was Canelo, obviously. Canelo was the star and he was the fan favorite in the arena. He was also the pick to win for most people in the business.

I think it becomes an easy excuse sometimes to just say, "Na, people just thought ________ won because he's a popular puncher." This does not fit that at all. GGG is not half as popular as Canelo, and Canelo is an exciting fighter too. The fact is, a lot of people who know what they are talking about thought GGG won the fight, there is no reason to accuse those people are just liking GGG's smile or some shit.

Also, Pac/Bradley isn't the same as Canelo/Golovkin either. Pac/Bradley was 3 experienced judges (one literally helped write the rules used to score the fight) all coming up with a similar score. Canelo/Golovkin was 2 judges seeing it one way and another with a weird score. So let me ask you, you know more about judging than Duane Ford? The guy who wrote the fucking rules? Fat Dan knows more? Teddy Atlas? Random pissed off sherdogger poster with Phillipines as his location?

Well, it wasn't just Teddy Atlas, Fat Dan, and some Filipino Sherdogger who thought that was a robbery. It was also every single boxer, analyst, and coach I've seen asked about the fight. So that's a pretty unfair characterization of the situation.

Duane Ford? I don't really care who judged the fight. Judging is subjective, and judges come away with ridiculous scores all the time. Whether that is incompetence, unclear scoring criteria, or corruption probably varies from fight to fight.

Having 2 close scores, and 1 really wide score, is a trend in Canelo fights. That hints at corruption, and may have cost a fighter who has done everything right and waited his turn a whole lot of money and credit. That 3rd score should have never existed, and if it instead was a legitimate judge in there then there is a pretty good chance that GGG walks away with a win. The outrage comes because people are sickened by the constant bullshit scores, especially with Canelo. That one score ruined the outcome of the fight. It was a great fight, but the outcome is tarnished by corruption or complete incompetence.

 

[DeJulez]

There were WAY more fans who bought that fight only because it was Canelo, obviously. Canelo was the star and he was the fan favorite in the arena. He was also the pick to win for most people in the business.

I think it becomes an easy excuse sometimes to just say, "Na, people just thought ________ won because he's a popular puncher." This does not fit that at all. GGG is not half as popular as Canelo, and Canelo is an exciting fighter too. The fact is, a lot of people who know what they are talking about thought GGG won the fight, there is no reason to accuse those people are just liking GGG's smile or some shit.




Well, it wasn't just Teddy Atlas, Fat Dan, and some Filipino Sherdogger who thought that was a robbery. It was also every single boxer, analyst, and coach I've seen asked about the fight. So that's a pretty unfair characterization of the situation.

Duane Ford? I don't really care who judged the fight. Judging is subjective, and judges come away with ridiculous scores all the time. Whether that is incompetence, unclear scoring criteria, or corruption probably varies from fight to fight.

Having 2 close scores, and 1 really wide score, is a trend in Canelo fights. That hints at corruption, and may have cost a fighter who has done everything right and waited his turn a whole lot of money and credit. That 3rd score should have never existed, and if it instead was a legitimate judge in there then there is a pretty good chance that GGG walks away with a win. The outrage comes because people are sickened by the constant bullshit scores, especially with Canelo. That one score ruined the outcome of the fight. It was a great fight, but the outcome is tarnished by corruption or complete incompetence.

People bought the fight because of both fighters, but I think Canelo has more haters who are vocal just like Mayweathers.

But I think most people simply dont know how to score fights. GGG didnt win any of the first 4 rounds. I think people see anybody who takes a step back as "losing" or "running".
Canelo moving around, and bouncing off the ropes is seen to the untrained eye as running, being scared, losing the fight. When in reality he was winning. Landing punches, dictating the pace, controlling the ring.
Even when fatigued he was still slipping and countering.

Canelo fought a good fight. His camp probably feels in a very good position to win the rematch.

 

[nac386]

@Seano

I don't think Paulie cares about guy's smiles.

 

[nac386]

People bought the fight because of both fighters, but I think Canelo has more haters who are vocal just like Mayweathers.

But I think most people simply dont know how to score fights. GGG didnt win any of the first 4 rounds. I think people see anybody who takes a step back as "losing" or "running".
Canelo moving around, and bouncing off the ropes is seen to the untrained eye as running, being scared, losing the fight. When in reality he was winning. Landing punches, dictating the pace, controlling the ring.
Even when fatigued he was still slipping and countering.

Canelo fought a good fight. His camp probably feels in a very good position to win the rematch.

That's fantasy-land shit DeJulez. I just posted a video of Paulie analyzing the fight, he had it 9-3 for Golovkin. You guys have to abandon this ridiculous idea that everyone who disagrees with you does not understand how to score fights.

I had it 6-6. But I thought it was easier to give more rounds for Golovkin than Canelo.

 

[Phisher]

I didn't have Bradley winning the first Pacquiao fight, but I found the framing of what happened in the fight after the fact to be ridiculous. People made out like Bradley was totally non-competitive and didn't win a single round.

Harold Lederman's scorecard was absurd, and the commentary largely ignored any work that Bradley did in the fight. Additionally, Compubox's recorded stats were totally inaccurate and some of the worst ever I've seen for a fight.

 

[DeJulez]

That's fantasy-land shit DeJulez. I just posted a video of Paulie analyzing the fight, he had it 9-3 for Golovkin. You guys have to abandon this ridiculous idea that everyone who disagrees with you does not understand how to score fights.

I had it 6-6. But I thought it was easier to give more rounds for Golovkin than Canelo.

I'm assuming Paulies being sarcastic.
9-3 is a horse shit scorecard for GGG