Bradley/Provodnikov and undercard RBR.

[Rover]

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.

Fine, but when you state an opinion, don't gripe when others respond and disagree with it.

[Blodhemn]

I've got no problem with people disagreeing with me. Your method is just redundant.

[Rover]

I've got no problem with people disagreeing with me. Your method is just redundant.

And yet you keep offering responses to what I say. I bring up different points as the disagreement continues.

[Datsue]

Though I'm chary of going into too much detail, Rover--as I don't think the topic warrants an in-depth exegesis--I scored the second 10-8 as... Well. It's not amateur boxing. Hitting hard & hurting the other dude has to count for something.

Prokovdionov won the round anyway, imo. & almost knocked Bradley's head off his shoulders two or three times. If you don't score that 10-8 yet do the "automatic" 10-8 thing in close, nothing-in-it rounds where a flash knockdown occurs (or even a solid, sit-you-on-your-arse one punch knockdown in which someone isn't really hurt, just dumped), it makes a mockery of the 10-point must system.

I know the 10-point must system is broken anyway, but I feel that not using its full extent permissible just makes our sport's scoring system worse.

I welcome more 10-8 rounds with no knockdown.

If you win the round conventionally (i.e. in my head I think you're in front in the round), especially if I think you're winning by a large margin, & you beat the shit out the other boy, &/or hurt him significantly, then you get a 10-8 round from me.

If you outbox him completely, own him with solid full-force shots & he can't land a glove on you, I would also like to occasionally score 10-8.

I know I know, "what are the criteria? Who decides ner-ner-ner-ner-ner-neeerrrrhhhh???? Accountability.... Nerrrrrrhhhhh", but frankly fvck it, boxing scoring's stupid anyway, imo the way I do it makes it slightly less stupid & somewhat more sensible.

Let me respond to your question with one of my own: if that's not a 10-8 round, apart from floor him, what else could Porokdioniv have done in order to achieve this? Or is it impossible for you to give such a round? I've heard people (maybe not you) say "Oh if a dude's getting hammered so bad I'd give him a 10-8 round then the fightshould be stopped", which seems fvcking ludicrous to me that a sport decided by millimetres & nths of a degree is scored with a fvcking paint roller ten inches across.

& furthermore is it not a bit fvcking silly that there is no gradation in the current system whereby a single point covers a huge spectrum of outcomes & differences in performance, so that 5 rounds of being battered across the ring perfectly equate in a scoring sense to five rounds nicked on work-rate & non-damaging arm punches?

Sorry, I just knew I'd spew like this, it's a huge topic & one we've all covered before. Guess it's an excuse to resurrect the canard, like...

[Rover]

Though I'm chary of going into too much detail, Rover--as I don't think the topic warrants an in-depth exegesis--I scored the second 10-8 as... Well. It's not amateur boxing. Hitting hard & hurting the other dude has to count for something.

Prokovdionov won the round anyway, imo. & almost knocked Bradley's head off his shoulders two or three times. If you don't score that 10-8 yet do the "automatic" 10-8 thing in close, nothing-in-it rounds where a flash knockdown occurs (or even a solid, sit-you-on-your-arse one punch knockdown in which someone isn't really hurt, just dumped), it makes a mockery of the 10-point must system.

I know the 10-point must system is broken anyway, but I feel that not using its full extent permissible just makes our sport's scoring system worse.

I welcome more 10-8 rounds with no knockdown.

If you win the round conventionally (i.e. in my head I think you're in front in the round), especially if I think you're winning by a large margin, & you beat the shit out the other boy, &/or hurt him significantly, then you get a 10-8 round from me.

If you outbox him completely, own him with solid full-force shots & he can't land a glove on you, I would also like to occasionally score 10-8.

I know I know, "what are the criteria? Who decides ner-ner-ner-ner-ner-neeerrrrhhhh???? Accountability.... Nerrrrrrhhhhh", but frankly fvck it, boxing scoring's stupid anyway, imo the way I do it makes it slightly less stupid & somewhat more sensible.

Let me respond to your question with one of my own: if that's not a 10-8 round, apart from floor him, what else could Porokdioniv have done in order to achieve this? Or is it impossible for you to give such a round? I've heard people (maybe not you) say "Oh if a dude's getting hammered so bad I'd give him a 10-8 round then the fightshould be stopped", which seems fvcking ludicrous to me that a sport decided by millimetres & nths of a degree is scored with a fvcking paint roller ten inches across.

& furthermore is it not a bit fvcking silly that there is no gradation in the current system whereby a single point covers a huge spectrum of outcomes & differences in performance, so that 5 rounds of being battered across the ring perfectly equate in a scoring sense to five rounds nicked on work-rate & non-damaging arm punches?

Sorry, I just knew I'd spew like this, it's a huge topic & one we've all covered before. Guess it's an excuse to resurrect the canard, like...

I don't score 10-8s unless there's a KD or a deduction.
It's like the NBA finals. Winning a game by 40 counts just as much as by 1.

[Rover]

You should go to CS in the Bradley/Provo poll thread and debate this with zorndeslammes.

[patscorpio]

Though I'm chary of going into too much detail, Rover--as I don't think the topic warrants an in-depth exegesis--I scored the second 10-8 as... Well. It's not amateur boxing. Hitting hard & hurting the other dude has to count for something.

Prokovdionov won the round anyway, imo. & almost knocked Bradley's head off his shoulders two or three times. If you don't score that 10-8 yet do the "automatic" 10-8 thing in close, nothing-in-it rounds where a flash knockdown occurs (or even a solid, sit-you-on-your-arse one punch knockdown in which someone isn't really hurt, just dumped), it makes a mockery of the 10-point must system.

I know the 10-point must system is broken anyway, but I feel that not using its full extent permissible just makes our sport's scoring system worse.

I welcome more 10-8 rounds with no knockdown.

If you win the round conventionally (i.e. in my head I think you're in front in the round), especially if I think you're winning by a large margin, & you beat the shit out the other boy, &/or hurt him significantly, then you get a 10-8 round from me.

If you outbox him completely, own him with solid full-force shots & he can't land a glove on you, I would also like to occasionally score 10-8.

I know I know, "what are the criteria? Who decides ner-ner-ner-ner-ner-neeerrrrhhhh???? Accountability.... Nerrrrrrhhhhh", but frankly fvck it, boxing scoring's stupid anyway, imo the way I do it makes it slightly less stupid & somewhat more sensible.

Let me respond to your question with one of my own: if that's not a 10-8 round, apart from floor him, what else could Porokdioniv have done in order to achieve this? Or is it impossible for you to give such a round? I've heard people (maybe not you) say "Oh if a dude's getting hammered so bad I'd give him a 10-8 round then the fightshould be stopped", which seems fvcking ludicrous to me that a sport decided by millimetres & nths of a degree is scored with a fvcking paint roller ten inches across.

& furthermore is it not a bit fvcking silly that there is no gradation in the current system whereby a single point covers a huge spectrum of outcomes & differences in performance, so that 5 rounds of being battered across the ring perfectly equate in a scoring sense to five rounds nicked on work-rate & non-damaging arm punches?

Sorry, I just knew I'd spew like this, it's a huge topic & one we've all covered before. Guess it's an excuse to resurrect the canard, like...

I don't score 10-8s unless there's a KD or a deduction.
It's like the NBA finals. Winning a game by 40 counts just as much as by 1.

ditto on the bolded

[marcianofan]

Though I'm chary of going into too much detail, Rover--as I don't think the topic warrants an in-depth exegesis--I scored the second 10-8 as... Well. It's not amateur boxing. Hitting hard & hurting the other dude has to count for something.

Prokovdionov won the round anyway, imo. & almost knocked Bradley's head off his shoulders two or three times. If you don't score that 10-8 yet do the "automatic" 10-8 thing in close, nothing-in-it rounds where a flash knockdown occurs (or even a solid, sit-you-on-your-arse one punch knockdown in which someone isn't really hurt, just dumped), it makes a mockery of the 10-point must system.

I know the 10-point must system is broken anyway, but I feel that not using its full extent permissible just makes our sport's scoring system worse.

I welcome more 10-8 rounds with no knockdown.

If you win the round conventionally (i.e. in my head I think you're in front in the round), especially if I think you're winning by a large margin, & you beat the shit out the other boy, &/or hurt him significantly, then you get a 10-8 round from me.

If you outbox him completely, own him with solid full-force shots & he can't land a glove on you, I would also like to occasionally score 10-8.

I know I know, "what are the criteria? Who decides ner-ner-ner-ner-ner-neeerrrrhhhh???? Accountability.... Nerrrrrrhhhhh", but frankly fvck it, boxing scoring's stupid anyway, imo the way I do it makes it slightly less stupid & somewhat more sensible.

Let me respond to your question with one of my own: if that's not a 10-8 round, apart from floor him, what else could Porokdioniv have done in order to achieve this? Or is it impossible for you to give such a round? I've heard people (maybe not you) say "Oh if a dude's getting hammered so bad I'd give him a 10-8 round then the fightshould be stopped", which seems fvcking ludicrous to me that a sport decided by millimetres & nths of a degree is scored with a fvcking paint roller ten inches across.

& furthermore is it not a bit fvcking silly that there is no gradation in the current system whereby a single point covers a huge spectrum of outcomes & differences in performance, so that 5 rounds of being battered across the ring perfectly equate in a scoring sense to five rounds nicked on work-rate & non-damaging arm punches?

Sorry, I just knew I'd spew like this, it's a huge topic & one we've all covered before. Guess it's an excuse to resurrect the canard, like...

You're doing something that is, in its effect, similar to the Argentine system in that it differentiates between close and non-close rounds. That's fine if you think it should be that way- I kinda agree with you. The problem is that you're scoring fights based on totally different criteria than the judges with whom you may wish to take issue with later, not to mention anyone else that you might debate scores with. This will tend to render your scorecards useless in debates like this because you'll often have scores that are incompatible for comparison with those of anyone that's applying the official system. It would be like using the 10-point must for a fight from the 30s, and then calling it a robbery if the 10-point must yields a different outcome from the rounds system.

Which brings me to perhaps the most convincing reason for uniform standards: the fact that the fighters' strategy and training is or should be geared towards the system on which they are actually being scored. That's why when I watch an Argentine fight, I score with the Argentine system. But let's take this fight as an example. So Bradley gets hurt in round 2. Under your criteria, the 10-8 is a foregone conclusion unless he manages to hurt RP back, which of course he doesn't have the power to do under the best of circumstances. So maybe fighting with your criteria in mind, he holds and runs and does everything he can to kill the clock, forgetting about offense altogether since he's definitely on his way to a 10-8 either way. But fighting with the actual judging criteria in mind, it made sense for him to punch back if he thinks he can avoid getting stopped while doing it, because the bar to avoid a 10-8 isn't all that high. He just has to have his moments, pretty much. And that's exactly what he pulled off, and in doing so earned 9 points to Provodnikov's 10. And that was the difference in the fight.

[Rover]

Since we're having a debate about scoring and the proper system, I've developed the Rover System.
This system is founded upon inconsistency; there's no set point must system.
I'll do an RBR of the fight using it.

[Rover]

Round 1: Big Provodnikov round! Pounded Bradley!
92-17 Provodnikov.
Round 2: Same as Round 1!
95-11 Provodnikov!
Round 3: Bradley comes alive!
Provodnikov doesn't do anything!
99-10 Bradley.
Round 4: Closer; 73-41 Bradley.
Round 5: Bradley big; 88-26 Bradley.
Round 6: Great round! Provodnikov takes it at the end!
112-70 Provodnikov.
Round 7: 90-30 Bradley.
Round 8: 84-27 Bradley.
Round 9: 76-32 Bradley.
Round 10: 79-48 Bradley.
Round 11: 98-60 Provodnikov.
Round 12: Huge for Provo! Had Bradley down!
238-61 Provodnikov!
Total: 849-808 Provodnikov!
Hey, that's pretty close, isn't it?

[marcianofan]

Round 1: Big Provodnikov round! Pounded Bradley!
92-17 Provodnikov.
Round 2: Same as Round 1!
95-11 Provodnikov!
Round 3: Bradley comes alive!
Provodnikov doesn't do anything!
99-10 Bradley.
Round 4: Closer; 73-41 Bradley.
Round 5: Bradley big; 88-26 Bradley.
Round 6: Great round! Provodnikov takes it at the end!
112-70 Provodnikov.
Round 7: 90-30 Bradley.
Round 8: 84-27 Bradley.
Round 9: 76-32 Bradley.
Round 10: 79-48 Bradley.
Round 11: 98-60 Provodnikov.
Round 12: Huge for Provo! Had Bradley down!
238-61 Provodnikov!
Total: 849-808 Provodnikov!
Hey, that's pretty close, isn't it?

Now THAT'S funny.

[gilgamesh]

Round 1: Big Provodnikov round! Pounded Bradley!
92-17 Provodnikov.
Round 2: Same as Round 1!
95-11 Provodnikov!
Round 3: Bradley comes alive!
Provodnikov doesn't do anything!
99-10 Bradley.
Round 4: Closer; 73-41 Bradley.
Round 5: Bradley big; 88-26 Bradley.
Round 6: Great round! Provodnikov takes it at the end!
112-70 Provodnikov.
Round 7: 90-30 Bradley.
Round 8: 84-27 Bradley.
Round 9: 76-32 Bradley.
Round 10: 79-48 Bradley.
Round 11: 98-60 Provodnikov.
Round 12: Huge for Provo! Had Bradley down!
238-61 Provodnikov!
Total: 849-808 Provodnikov!
Hey, that's pretty close, isn't it?

I don't know Round 12 seems more like a 240-59 round for me, to each his own though. :)

[Bobbyptsd]

I had Rios winning round 12

I know Rios wasn't fighting, but it's my system.

[gilgamesh]

I had Rios winning round 12

I know Rios wasn't fighting, but it's my system.

That's probably how he beat Abril, the judges gave him rounds from fights that he wasn't involved in.

[Rover]

Round 1: Big Provodnikov round! Pounded Bradley!
92-17 Provodnikov.
Round 2: Same as Round 1!
95-11 Provodnikov!
Round 3: Bradley comes alive!
Provodnikov doesn't do anything!
99-10 Bradley.
Round 4: Closer; 73-41 Bradley.
Round 5: Bradley big; 88-26 Bradley.
Round 6: Great round! Provodnikov takes it at the end!
112-70 Provodnikov.
Round 7: 90-30 Bradley.
Round 8: 84-27 Bradley.
Round 9: 76-32 Bradley.
Round 10: 79-48 Bradley.
Round 11: 98-60 Provodnikov.
Round 12: Huge for Provo! Had Bradley down!
238-61 Provodnikov!
Total: 849-808 Provodnikov!
Hey, that's pretty close, isn't it?

I don't know Round 12 seems more like a 240-59 round for me, to each his own though. :)

[Rover]

I had Rios winning round 12

I know Rios wasn't fighting, but it's my system.

No, Pacquiao won Round 12!

[Rover]

I had Rios winning round 12

I know Rios wasn't fighting, but it's my system.

That's probably how he beat Abril, the judges gave him rounds from fights that he wasn't involved in.

[Rover]

I had Rios winning round 12

I know Rios wasn't fighting, but it's my system.

The Rover System is better, damn you!

[JCS]

Perfecting my new scoring template...

Code: Select all

#       Winner         Deductions         Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  Provodnikov [***]                      Possible blown call - KD of Bradley
2  Provodnikov [** ]
3      Bradley [** ]
4      Bradley [** ]
5      Bradley [*  ]
6  Provodnikov [***]
7      Bradley [*  ]
8      Bradley [** ]
9      Bradley [*  ]
10     Bradley [** ]
11 Provodnikov [   ]
12 Provodnikov [***]   Bradley (1-MPD)


Final Scorecard
114-113 Bradley

Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [   ] rounds)
115-112 Bradley to 114-113 Bradley
Midpoint: Bradley by 2pts

Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [   ] and [*  ] rounds)
115-112 Bradley to 116-111 Provodnikov
Midpoint: Provodnikov by 1pt

Total Star Count (minus pt deductions) (Who "felt" like the winner)
Provodnikov 11 - Bradley 10

Each fighter won 2 of the 4 above metrics.

Confidence Scale
------------------

[***] - Impossible to score it differently.  Usually the loser gets seriously hurt.
[** ] - Definite reach to score for the other fighter, but not entirely impossible.
[*  ] - Arguable, but a likely score.
[   ] - Could've went to either fighter or scored even.

MPD  = Mandatory point deductions (knockdown, penalty).
NMPD = Non-mandatory point deductions.

[marcianofan]

Perfecting my new scoring template...

Code: Select all

#       Winner         Deductions         Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  Provodnikov [***]                      Possible blown call - KD of Bradley
2  Provodnikov [** ]
3      Bradley [** ]
4      Bradley [** ]
5      Bradley [*  ]
6  Provodnikov [***]
7      Bradley [*  ]
8      Bradley [** ]
9      Bradley [*  ]
10     Bradley [** ]
11 Provodnikov [   ]
12 Provodnikov [***]   Bradley (1-MPD)


Final Scorecard
114-113 Bradley

Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [   ] rounds)
115-112 Bradley to 114-113 Bradley

Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [   ] and [*  ] rounds)
115-112 Bradley to 116-111 Provodnikov

Total Star Count (minus pt deductions) (Who "felt" like the winner)
Provodnikov 11 - Bradley 10


Confidence Scale
------------------

[***] - Impossible to score it differently.  Usually the loser gets seriously hurt.
[** ] - Definite reach to score for the other fighter, but not entirely impossible.
[*  ] - Arguable, but a likely score.
[   ] - Could've went to either fighter or scored even.

MPD  = Mandatory point deductions (knockdown, penalty).
NMPD = Non-mandatory point deductions.

I keep a similar tally to that for the sake of argument when I score fights. Not saying fights should be scored that way necessarily, but I think it would help people get along better when discussing results if everyone looked at it kinda like that.