Broner/Malignaggi and undercard RBR.

[Uppercut1]

Man, Broner is lucky Paulie has no power. I thought the fight was super close. Paulie started standing in front of Broner after round 6 and it cost him. The fight could have gone either way though. Broner isn't anything special and Paulie proved that tonight. I too hope he doesn't get in sh!t for his comment in the interview, But it's truth the boxing public need to hear though. I take my hat off to Paulie tonight. Broner talking that smack in the post fight interview was some BS, especially after Paulie went up to him and tried to squash all the crap between them. I was a bit of a Broner fan till tonight. He'll get exposed soon enough I believe.

[Rover]

Broner saying he wants his fans to pick his next opponent.

Matthysse please

He'll avoid Matthysse like the plague.

Anyone with any kind of jab and workrate is knocking Broner's head off, Maidana, Matthysse, Soto-Karass, Guerrero...

Cano is a 50-50 fight with Broner

Have to agree, though I'd lean slightly to Broner.

[sucracristo]

o
one round that if you saw it differently, the whole fight just changed. Two rounds, and it's literally a different winner.

broner threw elbows and literally yanked down malinagi's head and rolled over his back and
kicked him. there were enough opportunities for the ref to take a point away from broner for
all the dirty crap he was doing. one point away from broner, deservedly, and malinaggi retains
his title. the thought i had in my head going into the last round was if malinaggi could just
do something to bait broner, he might have a shot at retaining his title, kind of like at the end
of haugen-camacho I

[lefty]

Anyway, night fella's! Im fucked!

Goodnight Lefty.

Night mate.

[lefty]

Anyway, night fella's! Im fucked!

Night.

Night dude.

[dookus]

@Crusader

Because that hardly ever happens in boxing, you know that. That's why I mentioned the football thing. I mean, hardly anyone here even agrees on the score, and many disagree on even the winner.

If you saw it as a definite, let's say 115-113 fight that's fine, but I think you'd concede that's one round that if you saw it differently, the whole fight just changed. Two rounds, and it's literally a different winner.

If the rounds were THAT well defined, sure. But I don't know that I've ever seen that happen, particularly in a close fight.

If it can happen there's no mutual exclusivity.

I can think of several instances in which fighters won close but clear fights, such as Jamie McDonnell-Julio Ceja and Marco Huck-Ola Afolabi I. I also had Nathan Cleverly beating Tony Bellew 115-114 and I would've had it 114-114 if I scored the even round for Bellew, which would've been fair to do. Yet I couldn't find another round to score for Bellew, meaning that even though I had it so close and could see a draw I don't think a win for Bellew would've been fair.

Another good example would be Jirov - Mesi, which was scored 94-93 x 3 and would be basically impossible to score any other way from the way the fight went.

[zojo]

Got up early to catch the fight. I missed the Banks/Mitchell fight, but caught the main event:

1. After six rounds, I had it 5-1 for Paulie. After that, Broner won every round.

2. When I heard the last card being 117-111, I assumed that would go to Paulie from him racking up the points early in the fight.

3. When Broner stated that he would let the fans choose his next fight, I was waiting for him to give us options to choose from. Since he did not, please let me make my choice now: Wladimir Klitschko.

4. Not sure about the squabble during the post-fight questions. I always find post-fight interviews pedantic. After all, the guys were just punched in the head for the past half-hour. Chances are they are not going to be the most clear minded when answering questions.

[Bobbyptsd]

@Crusader

Because that hardly ever happens in boxing, you know that. That's why I mentioned the football thing. I mean, hardly anyone here even agrees on the score, and many disagree on even the winner.

If you saw it as a definite, let's say 115-113 fight that's fine, but I think you'd concede that's one round that if you saw it differently, the whole fight just changed. Two rounds, and it's literally a different winner.

If the rounds were THAT well defined, sure. But I don't know that I've ever seen that happen, particularly in a close fight.

If it can happen there's no mutual exclusivity.

I can think of several instances in which fighters won close but clear fights, such as Jamie McDonnell-Julio Ceja and Marco Huck-Ola Afolabi I. I also had Nathan Cleverly beating Tony Bellew 115-114 and I would've had it 114-114 if I scored the even round for Bellew, which would've been fair to do. Yet I couldn't find another round to score for Bellew, meaning that even though I had it so close and could see a draw I don't think a win for Bellew would've been fair.

That's why I said they kind of are. It's not completely, objectively impossible, sure. But it's very very unlikely.

And again, if you change one round in the fight you mentioned, it goes the other way. I'm hard pressed to believe that one round the other way, that any of those rounds would have been unthinkable.

I didn't see that particular fight, so it's hard for me to comment on it specifically. But to go back to my football analogy, if Brazil beats France 2-1 well that's close, but clear. I can't think of any fight I've ever seen which was very close, but there's just no way I could see one, or even two rounds going the other way. I mean like absolutely no way those round(s) could go the other way. If the whole fight was so close, usually at least a couple of rounds in the fight were as well because well, it is the nature of the fight.

[RadioElRadar]

Broner saying he wants his fans to pick his next opponent.

Matthysse please

He'll avoid Matthysse like the plague.

Anyone with any kind of jab and workrate is knocking Broner's head off, Maidana, Matthysse, Soto-Karass, Guerrero...

Cano is a 50-50 fight with Broner

Absolutely agree. It sounds daft coz it was a real demolition job but the 1 round I gave DeMarco (I forget which) he stayed pretty much exclusively outside, whereas the rest of the fight he was happy to indulge Broner on the inside and got taken apart.

A guy with a jab strong enough to make Broner blink (unlike Paulie tonight, who had alot of success tbf) and keep him at range can beat him handily.

[Bobbyptsd]

@Crusader

Because that hardly ever happens in boxing, you know that. That's why I mentioned the football thing. I mean, hardly anyone here even agrees on the score, and many disagree on even the winner.

If you saw it as a definite, let's say 115-113 fight that's fine, but I think you'd concede that's one round that if you saw it differently, the whole fight just changed. Two rounds, and it's literally a different winner.

If the rounds were THAT well defined, sure. But I don't know that I've ever seen that happen, particularly in a close fight.

If it can happen there's no mutual exclusivity.

I can think of several instances in which fighters won close but clear fights, such as Jamie McDonnell-Julio Ceja and Marco Huck-Ola Afolabi I. I also had Nathan Cleverly beating Tony Bellew 115-114 and I would've had it 114-114 if I scored the even round for Bellew, which would've been fair to do. Yet I couldn't find another round to score for Bellew, meaning that even though I had it so close and could see a draw I don't think a win for Bellew would've been fair.

Another good example would be Jirov - Mesi, which was scored 94-93 x 3 and would be basically impossible to score any other way from the way the fight went.

There are different ways that fight could have been scored, it just happened to be unanimous by the three judges in that case.. This is turning into: "Fights can be close but clear, because here's my opinion on fight x or y". That's the whole point, it's subjective, and if the whole fight was close, the nature of the rounds was probably close as well.

[crusader]

@Crusader

Because that hardly ever happens in boxing, you know that. That's why I mentioned the football thing. I mean, hardly anyone here even agrees on the score, and many disagree on even the winner.

If you saw it as a definite, let's say 115-113 fight that's fine, but I think you'd concede that's one round that if you saw it differently, the whole fight just changed. Two rounds, and it's literally a different winner.

If the rounds were THAT well defined, sure. But I don't know that I've ever seen that happen, particularly in a close fight.

If it can happen there's no mutual exclusivity.

I can think of several instances in which fighters won close but clear fights, such as Jamie McDonnell-Julio Ceja and Marco Huck-Ola Afolabi I. I also had Nathan Cleverly beating Tony Bellew 115-114 and I would've had it 114-114 if I scored the even round for Bellew, which would've been fair to do. Yet I couldn't find another round to score for Bellew, meaning that even though I had it so close and could see a draw I don't think a win for Bellew would've been fair.

That's why I said they kind of are. It's not completely, objectively impossible, sure. But it's very very unlikely.

And again, if you change one round in the fight you mentioned, it goes the other way. I'm hard pressed to believe that one round the other way, that any of those rounds would have been unthinkable.

I didn't see that particular fight, so it's hard for me to comment on it specifically. But to go back to my football analogy, if Brazil beats France 2-1 well that's close, but clear. I can't think of any fight I've ever seen which was very close, but there's just no way I could see one, or even two rounds going the other way. I mean like absolutely no way those round(s) could go the other way. If the whole fight was so close, usually at least a couple of rounds in the fight were as well because well, it is the nature of the fight.

Sure, a few of the rounds could be close and reasonably go either way, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of one fighter clearly deserving to win. There were rounds in the fights I mentioned earlier that could've fairly gone either way, but I still thought there should've been only one result in two of the fights, and only one winner in the other.

[Bobbyptsd]

I disagree, for reasons I stated above. But you make some good points, and I am tired, so I will concede this ground and fall into slumber like I did while watching the Valuev-Bergeron fight.

Now that was a close but clear fight. I mean I'm assuming it was, I was sleeping for half of it, as mentioned.

[crusader]

Valuev fights are always good to watch if you're having trouble sleeping.

[Rover]

Valuev fights are always good to watch if you're having trouble sleeping.

Ruiz fights are good also.

[Rover]

Got up early to catch the fight. I missed the Banks/Mitchell fight, but caught the main event:

1. After six rounds, I had it 5-1 for Paulie. After that, Broner won every round.

2. When I heard the last card being 117-111, I assumed that would go to Paulie from him racking up the points early in the fight.

3. When Broner stated that he would let the fans choose his next fight, I was waiting for him to give us options to choose from. Since he did not, please let me make my choice now: Wladimir Klitschko.

4. Not sure about the squabble during the post-fight questions. I always find post-fight interviews pedantic. After all, the guys were just punched in the head for the past half-hour. Chances are they are not going to be the most clear minded when answering questions.

Banks/Mitchell was worth missing.

[Tanzio]

115-113 Broner.

Paulie put on a fine performance tonight. He didn't quite have enough, but he showed us what level Broner is at, and that ain't p4p.

Broner is a simple punk. He actually thinks that having multiple children out of wedlock and bragging about bangin' some slut that some other boxer was bangin' gives him cred. Dude is going to fall hard. It ain't going to be pretty, and it is 50-50 it won't even be in the boxing ring.

Broner is not that quick. He is not that powerful. His defense is not that good. His counterpunching is not all that. They are going to have to continue to cherrypick their way along with him.

He is such a pathetic individual that I can't really even get excited about the foregone conclusion of his downfall.

[dookus]

What I'm taking away from tonight on Broner:

Good points - handspeed (landed a lot of lead rights), combinations (frankly blistering at times), power, chin (Malignaggi's no puncher, but he looked entirely unfazed by anything that landed, not even for a split second)

Bad points - footwork (plodding), workrate (poor for this level), defence (leaky - he cannot slip jabs)

First guy he faces with a good stiff jab, some power and some workrate (Ponce De Leon with a jab, if you like) will give Broner absolute nightmares. Let's not forget that Paulie was 1 swing round away from a draw. But you have to give Broner credit for jumping up to 147 and winning a title, even if it's against by far the weakest champion in the division.

[desperados]

116-112 Malignaggi

[NazNaci1]

This was a close fight. 115-113 either way, to me, was feasible. Paulie knew he was unlikely to get any kind of decision and Broner, as I said in another post, is a sucker for a solid left jab. He just can't get out of the way of them.

I think we need to be honest and realistic. Broner is a good fighter, speed, decent power and good accuracy but he lacks a fair bit and doesn't look like he is improving. Smack talk is just that, smack talk. If we can look past that, there is a good fighter there just not one who is pushing his talent enough and will, come unstuck sometime soon, in my opinion.

Left jab > Broner = Busted up loss.

[SFW]

Broner's ego is staggering, can't say he is worth the hype when you could easily say he has been beaten twice already.

[Rover]

Broner's ego is staggering, can't say he is worth the hype when you could easily say he has been beaten twice already.

Well, you can say that he has had rough outings with two guys that other top level fighters have blown through.

Yeah, Juanma and Mares stopped PDL, and I thought Gamboa won every round until the TD. PDL gave Broner a tough fight (at super feather). Khan and Hatton mowed Malignaggi down. Cotto beat him up also and fractured his orbital bone. Broner/Malignaggi was quite competitive.
Given Mosley's performance against Cano, Broner/Mosley doesn't seem as laughable to me now.

[JCS]

Easy win for Broner.

[JCS]

Easy win for Broner.

What was your score?

117-111

[Rover]

Easy win for Broner.

Hayman must've gotten to you, too!

[Rover]

Looks like this is by far the most active RBR thread in this forum to date. Broner is definitely bringing the haters.

columbo, D and I are mostly responsible for that.