Chambers2 wrote:The fact that 2 judges only gave Macklin 4 rounds each is ridiculous, he won 5 out the first 6 on my card. Sturm was the one landing the blows that were rocking Macklins head back, but Macklin landed more punches IMO, they just didn't have the eyecatching qualities of Sturm punches as Sturm head wasn't being rocked about.
IMO that doesn't mean Sturm won the fight, any country other than Germany and Macklin would've got the nod IMO
Chambers2 wrote:The fact that 2 judges only gave Macklin 4 rounds each is ridiculous, he won 5 out the first 6 on my card. Sturm was the one landing the blows that were rocking Macklins head back, but Macklin landed more punches IMO, they just didn't have the eyecatching qualities of Sturm punches as Sturm head wasn't being rocked about.
IMO that doesn't mean Sturm won the fight, any country other than Germany and Macklin would've got the nod IMO
I had it a draw or possibly Sturm, which is not failing to appreciate MM's fantastic effort in any way. It's just another case of anyone can see fights differently - especially judges, who have a different view from each other and from what we see on TV. A punch that connects from one judges' position might have been blocked from another's. There is always an element of guesswork at ringside, when a fighter's back may be to you and obscuring your view. Also, many people value punches thrown whether or not they are blocked, a quantity vs quality situation. So many ways to see tight fights.
Re my earlier point about the Japanese draw judge in Froch-Johnson (which I think the world disagrees with), it shows how easy it is to come up with freak scores. I would love to see the cards for Sturm-Macklin and see how they relate to each other, which rounds the judges agreed and disagreed on. Always interesting in a tight fight. I'll try and get hold of them.
You must have watched a fair amount of fights from ringside in the past, it always amazes me how differently a fight looks from near or far in the arena and again how it often looks different on TV. Watching/scoring a fight purely from TV is a flawed process.
I saw the Danny Williams fight yesterday and the camera had a habit of flicking from a regular view to that of the officials at ringside (true ringside, not somewhere 20 feet back) and it was quite odd seeing that - What looked fairly innocuous from one angle looked fairly heavy from another, particuarly when Williams was sagging on the ropes under fire at one point.
Chambers2 wrote:The fact that 2 judges only gave Macklin 4 rounds each is ridiculous, he won 5 out the first 6 on my card. Sturm was the one landing the blows that were rocking Macklins head back, but Macklin landed more punches IMO, they just didn't have the eyecatching qualities of Sturm punches as Sturm head wasn't being rocked about.
IMO that doesn't mean Sturm won the fight, any country other than Germany and Macklin would've got the nod IMO
I had it a draw or possibly Sturm, which is not failing to appreciate MM's fantastic effort in any way. It's just another case of anyone can see fights differently - especially judges, who have a different view from each other and from what we see on TV. A punch that connects from one judges' position might have been blocked from another's. There is always an element of guesswork at ringside, when a fighter's back may be to you and obscuring your view. Also, many people value punches thrown whether or not they are blocked, a quantity vs quality situation. So many ways to see tight fights.
Re my earlier point about the Japanese draw judge in Froch-Johnson (which I think the world disagrees with), it shows how easy it is to come up with freak scores. I would love to see the cards for Sturm-Macklin and see how they relate to each other, which rounds the judges agreed and disagreed on. Always interesting in a tight fight. I'll try and get hold of them.
You must have watched a fair amount of fights from ringside in the past, it always amazes me how differently a fight looks from near or far in the arena and again how it often looks different on TV. Watching/scoring a fight purely from TV is a flawed process.
I saw the Danny Williams fight yesterday and the camera had a habit of flicking from a regular view to that of the officials at ringside (true ringside, not somewhere 20 feet back) and it was quite odd seeing that - What looked fairly innocuous from one angle looked fairly heavy from another, particuarly when Williams was sagging on the ropes under fire at one point.
In all honesty Orb, I think that if you want to get the best overview of a fight, TV is the only way. Far far preferable for me. If you're not concerned about the atmosphere or the event, if you just want to see what the two blokes in the ring are doing (as I do), then it has to be TV every time.
anyway, it is done with now. regardless of who deserved to win it.
now, obviously macklin is probably entitled to a rematch. there would seem to be a demand for another such good fight. a score to settle, etc.
however, macklin's stock is surely raised in controversial defeat. should he go through it all again, knowing that the judges will give felix the benefit of the doubt? does this take something from his next performance, or inspire him to an extra level of intensity? does he go for the KO (ala catley-beyer)? or do he possibly accept an offer from a different champ (not impossible, surely)?
Chambers2 wrote:The fact that 2 judges only gave Macklin 4 rounds each is ridiculous, he won 5 out the first 6 on my card. Sturm was the one landing the blows that were rocking Macklins head back, but Macklin landed more punches IMO, they just didn't have the eyecatching qualities of Sturm punches as Sturm head wasn't being rocked about.
IMO that doesn't mean Sturm won the fight, any country other than Germany and Macklin would've got the nod IMO
Why though? You can clearly see that a lot of people (probably a majority) in this forum thought the decision was fair.
Glyn Leach wrote:Whoah! Men! It's OK, we don't have to argue about who won anymore, we have the official result.
Ray Feel says it was 117-111 for Macklin, and therefore it was.
End of subject. Close this thread. Now redundant.
ah yes ray-feel . another big fat head self proclaimed boxing expert on tv who never speaks in sentences and goes on and on and hogs the camera without telling us anything new.
Chambers2 wrote:The fact that 2 judges only gave Macklin 4 rounds each is ridiculous, he won 5 out the first 6 on my card. Sturm was the one landing the blows that were rocking Macklins head back, but Macklin landed more punches IMO, they just didn't have the eyecatching qualities of Sturm punches as Sturm head wasn't being rocked about.
IMO that doesn't mean Sturm won the fight, any country other than Germany and Macklin would've got the nod IMO
Why though? You can clearly see that a lot of people (probably a majority) in this forum thought the decision was fair.
I thought Sturm won. It was close but Sturm done enough, in my opinion.
hurlock wrote:macklin won that :!: i fail too see what sturm actually done apart from cover up & take punishment??
So at no point in the bout do you think he did more than that? Think we must have been watching different fights from 5 or 6 rounds. Macklin’s performance was great, but the fact he stood up to Sturm’s solid shots made it better for me, and denying Sturm did anything does Macklin a disservice in my opinion.
Glyn Leach wrote:Whoah! Men! It's OK, we don't have to argue about who won anymore, we have the official result.
Ray Feel says it was 117-111 for Macklin, and therefore it was.
End of subject. Close this thread. Now redundant.
ah yes ray-feel . another big fat head self proclaimed boxing expert on tv who never speaks in sentences and goes on and on and hogs the camera without telling us anything new.
Such disrespect Mugabi! I can tell you're a Gilfoid man!
We must turn to the legend that is The Gilf in our quest for the definitive verdict!
