# Winner Deductions Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Murat [* ]
2 Murat [ ]
3 Murat [ ]
4 Hopkins [** ]
5 Hopkins [* ]
6 Hopkins [ ]
7 Hopkins [** ] MPD-Murat
8 Hopkins [** ]
9 Hopkins [ ]
10 Hopkins [* ]
11 Hopkins [* ]
12 Hopkins [** ]
1 Final Scorecard
Hopkins 117-110
2 Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [ ] rounds)
Hopkins 119-108 to Hopkins 115-112
Midpoint: Hopkins 117-110
3 Widest Range of Scores (Giving each fighter all [ ] and [* ] rounds)
Hopkins 120-107 to Murat 115-112
Midpoint: Hopkins 116-111
4 Total Star Count (minus pt deductions) (Who "felt" like the winner)
Hopkins 12 | Murat 0
Hopkins wins 4 of 4 metrics above.
Final Thoughts: Hopkins 116-111 or 117-110 seem to be the sweet spot. Only the outer edge of the broadest metric supports a possible Murat scorecard. Only a blind, biased, corrupt individual could've possibly scored this for Murat.
Confidence Scale
------------------
[***] - Impossible to score it differently. Usually the loser gets hurt or does absolutely nothing.
[** ] - Definite reach to score differently.
[* ] - 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.
The day I take your opinion on music seriously is the day I stop being a citizen of Earth. Even your taste in boxers is grotesque. You like Hopkins and Ward over someone like Kovalev. Horrible, and worthless taste.
Blodhemn wrote:The day I take your opinion on music seriously is the day I stop being a citizen of Earth. Even your taste in boxers is grotesque. You like Hopkins and Ward over someone like Kovalev. Horrible, and worthless taste.
Unlike you, I dont lie on the internet. About anything. Especially to faceless internet caricatures such as yourself. You talk about "taste" and you listen to that garbage music linked below, as if my opinion of you couldnt get any lower, jesus christ, one day perhaps you'll grow up and become an adult. May as well listen to crap like Lil Wayne and 2Chainz while you're at it.
Blodhemn wrote:The day I take your opinion on music seriously is the day I stop being a citizen of Earth. Even your taste in boxers is grotesque. You like Hopkins and Ward over someone like Kovalev. Horrible, and worthless taste.
Unlike you, I dont lie on the internet. About anything. Especially to faceless internet caricatures such as yourself. You talk about "taste" and you listen to that garbage music linked below, as if my opinion of you couldnt get any lower, jesus christ, one day perhaps you'll grow up and become an adult. May as well listen to crap like Lil Wayne and 2Chainz while you're at it.
You're just too easy to fool, and usually since you're on the losing end of an argument you think you've finally stumbled onto something.
Pick up a guitar and try to replicate what they do, wait no, don't because I know you can't. Learn a bit about music theory, chord progressions, song structure, wait, you can't - picking out winners in boxing is a task too difficult for you.
Blodhemn wrote:
Pick up a guitar and try to replicate what they do, wait no, don't because I know you can't. Learn a bit about music theory, chord progressions, song structure, wait, you can't - picking out winners in boxing is a task too difficult for you.
Gotta agree with diddy this time..
It's not really about musical skill appreciation though. We're not a bunch of PhD's from Juilliard judging guitar ability. It's about knowing what sounds good and knowing what sounds like sh1t. My ears tell me the latter... like I said, as if someone took The Ultimate Warrior's WWF theme song, puked on the track and chanted to Satan over top of it.
Yeah and there's 2 other people in this thread who agrees with me. So who's right? No one. Enslaved is what I listen to when I want to hear interesting chord progressions with a rhythmic, almost percussive rhythm section and melodic leads. You don't need a PhD, just a general interest in song structure. If I want to hear something catchier, slower, faster, I'll listen to something else.
Offensive art > defensive art. Also it's harder coming forward, making the fight and avoid getting hit than it is the other way around. Got to respect offensive art specialists that much more.
Offensive talent? That's like saying Kovalev is a defensive talent. Of course to be at the pinnacle of the sport, even someone like Kovalev has a level of defense and Mayweather has a level of offense, but neither guy could fight like the other and be as successful. They're both artists. I prefer offensive artists. I don't care what anyone prefers unless you're going to be a dick about it.
This thread took a turn.