So Oscar paid off one judge in a sport where it takes at least 2 to determine a winner, lol. And if you're going to tell me he paid them all off then why pay for a Draw? Dumb theory you have there. It's a simple case of one judges subjective viewing being off and silly fans that buy into conspiracy theories and watch too many mobster movies making shit bigger than it is because they are mad their guy didn't win.Irrelevant. Many have excepted that it was scored a draw. We just dont understand how anyone could of had that 118 - 110. It shows she was paid off. Its simple. Probably by Oscar.
I don't think it needs to be that complicated. Just raise the number of judges to 5. I've been arguing this for years. In any sort of poll a bigger sample size leads to more accurate results.Is the solution to bad judging to be found in other sports?
I personally had GGG by 2 rounds and the poll here suggest an overwhelming majority saw a completely different fight to Mrs Byrd.
Changing judges may not have changed the result - it's entirely feasible another judge may have scored the bout closely in favour of Alvarez. Regardless of that fact the 118-110 score leaves a really bad taste in a lot of people's mouths and has generated talk of fixing and bias etc.
This got me thinking of a way to try to eliminate the problem and to put the focus back on what was an excellent boxing bout and away from the perceived controversy. Could boxing take a leaf out of the book of Olympic sports such as diving and gymnastics (plus others I can't recall off the top of my head) and remove the most extreme scores to take an average of the more moderate scores.
How would it work? Take the number of judges from 3 to 5. The bouts are scored as normal. At the end of a fight the highest score in favour of boxer A is discarded and the highest score in favour of boxer B is discarded. The result is decided by the remaining three judges scorecards.
I don't believe many decisions would change but it should stop lopsided views from skewing results and causing fans concern like Adelaide Byrd did last night.
lol. bitch is blind. maybe she thought ggg was the ginger?The cards
![]()
one judge's subjective viewing being off is one thing, a judge giving gennady golovkin 2 rounds in that fight is something else entirely.So Oscar paid off one judge in a sport where it takes at least 2 to determine a winner, lol. And if you're going to tell me he paid them all off then why pay for a Draw? Dumb theory you have there. It's a simple case of one judges subjective viewing being off and silly fans that buy into conspiracy theories and watch too many mobster movies making shit bigger than it is because they are mad their guy didn't win.
Canelo schooled him. GGG was marching forward blindly, eating punches all over the place and landing nothing. He had no answer for Canelo. He got owned.
Surprised anybody thinks otherwise, but the Russians seem popular these days, so I guess that explains it.
Canelo schooled him. GGG was marching forward blindly, eating punches all over the place and landing nothing. He had no answer for Canelo. He got owned.
Surprised anybody thinks otherwise, but the Russians seem popular these days, so I guess that explains it.
Canelo schooled him. GGG was marching forward blindly, eating punches all over the place and landing nothing. He had no answer for Canelo. He got owned.
Surprised anybody thinks otherwise, but the Russians seem popular these days, so I guess that explains it.
gennady landed 218 punches, to canelo's 169.
gennady landed more punches than canelo in 10 out of 12 rounds.
let me guess, mcgregor held his own against mayweather?