Bradley/Provodnikov and undercard RBR.

[Rover]

lol @ all of these bitter Pacquiao fans giving out 10-8 rounds to Provodnikov like candy

What does Pac have to do with it?
Tanzio scored that fight for Bradley.
And I didn't give Provodnikov another 10-8 round, but Russell blew that call, and it's a legitimate position to have done so, though I didn't.

[Rover]

It was a draw to me. Russell blew the call.

Regardless, Tim Bradley will never be the same after that.

Hope you're wrong about that last point.

[marcianofan]

I had it 114-113 given the constraints and mandate of a judge, but think it should have been 113-113 if the knockdown had been called correctly. I don't even blame Pat Russell. It was a tough call in the moment. Replay showed it was a KD, and the fact that Bradley got up from the "slip" and then went down again made it look really bad, but in real time I wasn't sure if Provodnikov had pushed down on his back to cause the fall or not. If you watched closely, you could tell that Russell immediately regretted the call, too. When Bradley went down the second time, Russell yelled "DOWN!," which is what a ref normally does to indicate a knockdown right before starting the count. But then he realized that he couldn't just start the count at that point since he obviously didn't go down from a punch that time.

It was a pretty easy fight to score for the most part. Provodnikov clearly won 1, 2, 6, 11, and 12 (10-8). Lederman gave Bradley round 11, but I didn't think it was particularly close. Bradley was spent and was shoe-shining while backing up, while Provodnikov was landing clean crisp punches. Bradley clearly won 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8. 9 and 10 were tossups, and I gave both to Bradley. So honestly I think Provodnikov could have won 115-112 or 114-113 even without his first knockdown being counted. Bradley won by a point at most in my opinion. This was definitely the kind of fight you wish could have been a draw.

[Rover]

I had it 114-113 given the constraints and mandate of a judge, but think it should have been 113-113 if the knockdown had been called correctly. I don't even blame Pat Russell. It was a tough call in the moment. Replay showed it was a KD, and the fact that Bradley got up from the "slip" and then went down again made it look really bad, but in real time I wasn't sure if Provodnikov had pushed down on his back to cause the fall or not. If you watched closely, you could tell that Russell immediately regretted the call, too. When Bradley went down the second time, Russell yelled "DOWN!," which is what a ref normally does to indicate a knockdown right before starting the count. But then he realized that he couldn't just start the count at that point since he obviously didn't go down from a punch that time.

It was a pretty easy fight to score for the most part. Provodnikov clearly won 1, 2, 6, 11, and 12 (10-8). Lederman gave Bradley round 11, but I didn't think it was particularly close. Bradley was spent and was shoe-shining while backing up, while Provodnikov was landing clean crisp punches. Bradley clearly won 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8. 9 and 10 were tossups, and I gave both to Bradley. So honestly I think Provodnikov could have won 115-112 or 114-113 even without his first knockdown being counted. Bradley won by a point at most in my opinion. This was definitely the kind of fight you wish could have been a draw.

I have no problem not scoring 10-8s unless there's a KD; in fact, I score that way, but that isn't a mandate, right? I mean by that that no rule prohibits a judge's doing so.

[Rover]

Bradley weighs an all-time high of 159 tonight to Provo's 150

Bradley was 147 for Pacquiao and Alexander both and 148 for Abregu

Bradley blew up to 240 pounds laying in a pile of money the last 6 months of 2012. So it makes sense he put weight back on.

240? Thought they said he gained 40?

[Rover]

BTW, where was Buffer last night?

[gilgamesh]

It was a draw to me. Russell blew the call.

Regardless, Tim Bradley will never be the same after that.

Hope you're wrong about that last point.

I do too, but taking hard shots does lower your punch resistance over time and Tim took about 10 fights worth of damage last night.

[Rover]

Is this Tim Bradley in November or Dan Rafael ?

[Rover]

Provodnikov should be unbeaten. They robbed him against Herrera on FNF. Herrera had to get his entire face repaired.

I had it a draw. No robbery, and apparently Provodnikov agrees it wasn't.

[marcianofan]

I have no problem not scoring 10-8s unless there's a KD; in fact, I score that way, but that isn't a mandate, right? I mean by that that no rule prohibits a judge's doing so.

Oh I have no problem with scoring 10-8 rounds without a knockdown. I have noticed that I do so more than the average judge, in fact. But you're not supposed to overrule the ref on whether there was a knockdown or not, and that's honestly the only justification for that one being a 10-8. Yes, Bradley was badly hurt at the end, but like Steve Weisfeld said at the end, Bradley did plenty of work during the rest of the round. It wasn't an especially dominant round overall. Taking the round as a whole, there were probably at least 2 or 3 10-9 rounds in the fight that were more lopsided than that one.

I like Max Kellerman, but he seems to believe that badly hurting a guy alone is sufficient to create a 10-8 round. His position in this instance seems to be that getting badly wobbled should be scored like a technical knockdown, except that you could only get credit for it once per round.

The 5th round for Vargas on the undercard was an example of a true 10-8 round (which, incidentally, it appears all 3 of the judges failed to recognize), since not only was Lucky Boy badly hurt, but Vargas dominated the round overall.

[Rover]

I have no problem not scoring 10-8s unless there's a KD; in fact, I score that way, but that isn't a mandate, right? I mean by that that no rule prohibits a judge's doing so.

Oh I have no problem with scoring 10-8 rounds without a knockdown. I have noticed that I do so more than the average judge, in fact. But you're not supposed to overrule the ref on whether there was a knockdown or not, and that's honestly the only justification for that one being a 10-8. Yes, Bradley was badly hurt at the end, but like Steve Weisfeld said at the end, Bradley did plenty of work during the rest of the round. It wasn't an especially dominant round overall. Taking the round as a whole, there were probably at least 2 or 3 10-9 rounds in the fight that were more lopsided than that one.

I like Max Kellerman, but he seems to believe that badly hurting a guy alone is sufficient to create a 10-8 round. His position in this instance seems to be that getting badly wobbled should be scored like a technical knockdown, except that you could only get credit for it once per round.

The 5th round for Vargas on the undercard was an example of a true 10-8 round (which, incidentally, it appears all 3 of the judges failed to recognize), since not only was Lucky Boy badly hurt, but Vargas dominated the round overall.

I also scored the round 10-9. But one would have to try to mind read for judges who scored it 10-8.
No judge scored the tenth round of Pac/Mosley 10-8, and I'd imagine that this is because they rightly thought the KD call was wrong.

[gilgamesh]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

[Rover]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

I don't score 10-8s without a KD. The problem for me with doing that (though it's allowed) is where to draw the line. How about Rd. 3 of last night's fight, where Bradley outlanded RP 21-2 and RP only threw 15 punches, prompting the ref to check on him?

[Datsue]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

I don't score 10-8s without a KD. The problem for me with doing that (though it's allowed) is where to draw the line. How about Rd. 3 of last night's fight, where Bradley outlanded RP 21-2 and RP only threw 15 punches, prompting the ref to check on him?

I do this, but before I answer: is that a genuine question--i.e. do you actually want to hear others' opinions on the matter?--or are you looking for five pages of proving somebody "wrong" over something that's a matter of opinion, with added smilies?

I ask only for information, not for personal gain.

[Datsue]

lol @ all of these bitter Pacquiao fans giving out 10-8 rounds to Provodnikov like candy

Are you so fuckwitted you cannot see that you've just called a man with the location "DINAMITA!!!!!!" a "bitter Pacquiao fan"?

I mean, do you actually use your eyes or the useless organ that keeps your ears apart before you post or what?

[gilgamesh]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

I don't score 10-8s without a KD. The problem for me with doing that (though it's allowed) is where to draw the line. How about Rd. 3 of last night's fight, where Bradley outlanded RP 21-2 and RP only threw 15 punches, prompting the ref to check on him?

I know what you mean which is why every round last night was 10-9 except for round 12 on my card. There's another slightly similar scoring situation that occurs sometimes where a fighter will get dropped and rally back to possibly make it a 10-9 round instead of a 10-8 round. An example that comes to mind is Jameel McCline vs Calvin Brock...similarly in this situation I generally still go with the 10-8 score in favor of the fighter who scored the knockdown merely because I feel a knockdown should almost always merit an extra point. The few instances that I probably wouldn't do that, is like if I thought the knockdown was a bad call by the ref and should've been a slip or something and the fighter it was called on came back and dominated the remainder of the round. Most of the time, I prefer to score the way I feel the official judges would, if they were scoring properly.

[Rover]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

I don't score 10-8s without a KD. The problem for me with doing that (though it's allowed) is where to draw the line. How about Rd. 3 of last night's fight, where Bradley outlanded RP 21-2 and RP only threw 15 punches, prompting the ref to check on him?

I do this, but before I answer: is that a genuine question--i.e. do you actually want to hear others' opinions on the matter?--or are you looking for five pages of proving somebody "wrong" over something that's a matter of opinion, with added smilies?

I ask only for information, not for personal gain.

No, I was stating my opinion and giving an example of the "Where do you draw the line?" question.

[Rover]

lol @ all of these bitter Pacquiao fans giving out 10-8 rounds to Provodnikov like candy

Are you so fuckwitted you cannot see that you've just called a man with the location "DINAMITA!!!!!!" a "bitter Pacquiao fan"?

I mean, do you actually use your eyes or the useless organ that keeps your ears apart before you post or what?

[Rover]

It takes an awful lot for me to score a 10-8 round for a guy without a knockdown, basically he has to have the other guy on the verge of a stoppage for a long stretch of time, even then if the other guy is fighting back and landing his share or did good work before hand, I still generally don't go 10-8. I will if the other guy did nothing noteworthy in the round and got the hell beat out of him like I mentioned though, not often that I've done it. But if a judge had scored the 1st or 2nd round a 10-8 round in Ruslan's favor, that would be a reasonable judgment. He hurt Tim very, very badly in those rounds, in my view Tim stood and fought back enough though and generally got the better of it in the early portion of both of those rounds, which is why I only scored either one 10-9.

I don't score 10-8s without a KD. The problem for me with doing that (though it's allowed) is where to draw the line. How about Rd. 3 of last night's fight, where Bradley outlanded RP 21-2 and RP only threw 15 punches, prompting the ref to check on him?

I know what you mean which is why every round last night was 10-9 except for round 12 on my card. There's another slightly similar scoring situation that occurs sometimes where a fighter will get dropped and rally back to possibly make it a 10-9 round instead of a 10-8 round. An example that comes to mind is Jameel McCline vs Calvin Brock...similarly in this situation I generally still go with the 10-8 score in favor of the fighter who scored the knockdown merely because I feel a knockdown should almost always merit an extra point. The few instances that I probably wouldn't do that, is like if I thought the knockdown was a bad call by the ref and should've been a slip or something and the fighter it was called on came back and dominated the remainder of the round. Most of the time, I prefer to score the way I feel the official judges would, if they were scoring properly.

I always go 10-8 with a KD. Even in Pac-Mosley when replays clerly showed that was wrong; same with Calzaghe/Jones. Judges don't have the benefit of replay, so I don't factor it into my scoring.

[cletomex]

lol @ all of these bitter Pacquiao fans giving out 10-8 rounds to Provodnikov like candy

Are you so fuckwitted you cannot see that you've just called a man with the location "DINAMITA!!!!!!" a "bitter Pacquiao fan"?

I mean, do you actually use your eyes or the useless organ that keeps your ears apart before you post or what?

Haha. Hook, line and sinker.

[Blodhemn]

Rewatched the fight. Clear cut no questions asked RP rounds were 1,2,6,11,12. Round 7 was debateable.

Bradley got hurt more often than I thought, in rounds 1,2,6,7,10,11,12 and looked like it in the 9th also but not sure if that was just tired legs. Christ...

[Rover]

Rewatched the fight. Clear cut no questions asked RP rounds were 1,2,6,11,12. Round 7 was debateable.

Bradley got hurt more often than I thought, in rounds 1,2,6,7,10,11,12 and looked like it in the 9th also but not sure if that was just tired legs. Christ...

11 wasn't clear cut, though I gave it to RP. 7 wasn't debatable, either. Every card I've seen had it for Bradley.

[Blodhemn]

11 was absolutely clear cut. You weren't paying attention if you scored that round for Bradley. That's ridiculous.

And I believe it was round 7 where, Bradley outboxed Ruslan and landed only a small number more, but got rocked by power punches and visably hurt. So yea, it's debateable depending what you think is more effective. More punches that don't hurt the opponent or less, and not less by a huge margin that do damage.

[Rover]

11 was absolutely clear cut. You weren't paying attention if you scored that round for Bradley. That's ridiculous.

And I believe it was round 7 where, Bradley outboxed Ruslan and landed only a small number more, but got rocked by power punches and visably hurt. So yea, it's debateable depending what you think is more effective. More punches that don't hurt the opponent or less, and not less by a huge margin that do damage.

1. Yes, 11 was debatable, and I scored it for RP. I've seen several cards having it for Bradley.
2. 7 was not debatable. I've seen not one card for RP that round. ZERO.

[Blodhemn]

Look, I'm not doing this with you like you love to do in every thread.

It's your opinion, and mine is different. End of story.